[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: exploitation of "Auditory List" as a free "Article Request" list
Why not requesting a (PDF) reprint directly from the author(s)? It was not so challenging to find the senior author's mail address by a Google search.
Am 06.08.2012 um 14:09 schrieb Tom Barker <thomas.barker@xxxxxx>:
> Brian's position is understandable. Creating too much noise from constant article requests reduces the ability for useful discussion on the list.
> From a selfish point of view, it is simply more efficient to request an unavailable (on my university's library subscription) article here, and receive responses within a few minutes, than to travel to the other university or public library in my city and work out how the request system works there.
> There is also the (serious) issue of intellectual property rights. I personally feel uncomfortable with a request for a PDF of an entire book here. Clearly, in most jurisdictions, photocopying an entire book is not legal. This list is a useful resource, and it is unfair on the list owners (located in the US) to subject them to any liability for the lists misuse in this regard.
> I am not sure about the general case of copying of a single journal or conference paper, but in the UK I believe it was acceptable to copy a single book chapter, conference paper or journal article within the University. Electronic transmission might be treated differently, but I would advise against anyone fulfilling requests directly to the list, instead posting directly to the address of anyone requesting the article.
> Requests for articles may raise general awareness of interesting publications, and this is definitely one benefit from posting requests here.
> On 06/08/12 14:38, Marcelo Caetano wrote:
>> Dear Brian and members of the list,
>> I disagree with Brian's characterization of article requests as "rather excessive use of this list for obtaining articles". Personally, I have a hunch that the frequent article requests might better reflect flaws in the library system (amongs others) rather than plain laziness.
>> Unfortunately, I don't have data to confirm this impression (does anyone?). However, we usually see immediate responses to article requests made on the list, in opposition to the alternatives Brian points out. Ultimately, I feel that this discussion is very in line with ongoing debates on issues about intellectual and property rights, and I think we all could very much benefit from actively engaging in it.
>> Marcelo Caetano
>> De: Brian FG Katz <brian.katz@xxxxxxxx>
>> Para: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Enviadas: Segunda-feira, 6 de Agosto de 2012 11:57
>> Assunto: [AUDITORY] exploitation of "Auditory List" as a free "Article Request" list
>> Dear list members,
>> I would like to bring to people's attention the rather excessive use of this
>> list for obtaining articles. While I understand that some articles may be
>> hard to find, being old, or in obscure journals, the constant flow of
>> requests for articles that are clearly available, albeit for a fee, is
>> something of an abuse of the list and also the library system.
>> Student especially should profit from the systems in place at their
>> respective institutions, and if need be actually go to a library. Many
>> libraries also offer article retrieval services, which should be *fully*
>> exploited before make a global request to the open community.
>> Students are also encouraged to contact the authors directly to obtain
>> difficult articles, as a means of expressing interest, and possibly opening
>> a dialog.
>> Only as a last resort should the list be used as a resource for "freely"
>> obtaining your bibliographic references.
>> -Brian FG Katz
>> Brian FG Katz, Ph.D
>> Audio & Acoustique
>> BP 133
>> F91403 Orsay
>> tel. (+33) 01 69 85 81 55
>> fax. (+33) 01.69.85.80.88
>> e-mail Brian.Katz@xxxxxxxx <mailto:Brian.Katz@xxxxxxxx>
>> web_theme: http://www.limsi.fr/Scientifique/aa/thmsonesp/
>> web_group: http://www.limsi.fr/Scientifique/aa/