If I want to link a paywalled paper as my source, can I post a direct link through sci-hub, or should I just leave the doi link, and let people seek access by themselves?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
-
$\begingroup$ CMs, please note there may be a legal issue with this in the United States. See David Hammen's answer below. $\endgroup$– called2voyage ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:24
-
$\begingroup$ Checking with our legal team, @called2voyage :) $\endgroup$– JNat StaffModCommented Oct 14, 2020 at 16:19
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
15
This is a belated answer; the same topic just came up on the skeptics.SE meta.
If I want to link a paywalled paper as my source, can I post a direct link through sci-hub, or should I just leave the doi link, and let people seek access by themselves?
It's not an either-or question. For one thing, you can do both. For another, many authors post draft versions at arxiv.org. Other authors post draft versions (or even final versions) on a sponsoring organization's web site. I'd much rather see a DOI link and a legal link to a draft version rather than a DOI link and a (illegal for me) link to sci-hub.
People who know how to go to sci-hub can easily do so given the DOI. So please give the DOI. The intent of doi.org is to provide a unique and long-lived reference that is not subject to link rot. While sci-hub does use the DOI, sci-hub links are highly subject to link rot because sci-hub is illegal in many countries. To make matters worse, multiple work sites either block sci-hub or make it clear that going to sites such as sci-hub can get one fired.
For these reasons, I recommend that links to sci-hub be disallowed.
-
$\begingroup$ So... you downvoted mine which says to do both, and label them accordingly, and then posted pretty much the same thing? $\endgroup$– Rory Alsop ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 7:45
-
1$\begingroup$ @RoryAlsop - My answer strongly discourages sci-hub links. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 9:13
-
$\begingroup$ No worries - I have updated to recommend marking it NSFW, and recommending it for availability reasons. $\endgroup$– Rory Alsop ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 11:09
-
1$\begingroup$ @RoryAlsop - No worries, I have updated to recommend that links to sci-hub be disallowed. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 11:36
-
$\begingroup$ @RoryAlsop Hmm...given that there is a legal issue here in the host country for Stack Exchange, it may be worth getting CM feedback here. $\endgroup$– called2voyage ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:24
-
$\begingroup$ You're probably right - although we have been told many times that copyright is not our problem as mods or community. $\endgroup$– Rory Alsop ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:30
-
$\begingroup$ @RoryAlsop True, but better to be sure, I think. $\endgroup$– called2voyage ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:36
-
$\begingroup$ @called2voyage - SE corporate does not have the resources to scan posts for copyright violations. (How could it?) From a corporate level, all SE can do is to remove posts for which a DMCA takedown was issued. SE does however allow and encourage community members to edit posts for copyright violations. There is a distinction here: Links to sci-hub should be viewed as de facto copyright violations. Open access articles that are also posted at sci-hub may be an exception, but in that case, there is no need to post the sci-hub link. Just publish the DOI link. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:50
-
$\begingroup$ @DavidHammen I'm not asking for them to scan posts. I'm asking for them to weigh in on this community policy. Since the community obviously disagrees over this. $\endgroup$– called2voyage ModCommented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:52
-
1$\begingroup$ Whether sci-hub is ethical or unethical is debatable. But that it is illegal in many countries, including the SE host country, is not. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:52
-
2$\begingroup$ Per called2voyage's request, the Community Team looked into this. While we don't have hard legal blocks, this answer is in line with our recommendation — avoid URLs to sites which host illegal content if possible, as linking to these may harm the site's SEO in the long run, which could cause the need for tougher legal restrictions to be put in place. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 26, 2021 at 14:45
-
-
2
-
1$\begingroup$ @uhoh, it stands for Search Engine Optimization. There are lots of things websites can do that will increase attention from Google, Bing, etc. There are also lots of things websites can do that might detract attention from Google, Bing, etc. Commercial websites want to do as much as they can to attract attention from search engines and as little as they can to detract attention. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 26, 2021 at 14:52
-
$\begingroup$ I have updated the Community Policy Repository to point to this answer. $\endgroup$– called2voyage ModCommented Mar 26, 2021 at 14:55
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
In my opinion, the best practice for paywalled sources is to leave the doi link.
-
2$\begingroup$ I concur. The very point of DOI is to provide a link that is not subject to link rot. This doesn't always work; I have occasionally run into DOI links that result in a 404 (link not found) failure, but this is very rare. Sci-hub on the other hand is extremely subject to link rot as sci-hub changes its website address with great regularity due to the fact that some countries view what sci-hub does as illegal. For those who are fans of sci-hub, it's a simple matter of pasting the DOI link into the sci-hub.wherever query field and voila! there it is. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 26, 2021 at 15:20
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
3
Yes, sci-hub links should be allowed.
I'd be tempted to say include both the doi link and sci-hub link. Many will never be able to use the doi link so the sci-hub link will let them understand your post, and in fact for general availability reasons sci-hub is the better bet.
You could even mark the sci-hub link as NSFW to warn readers in countries where it may be considered illegal.
-
$\begingroup$ Is recommending a Sci-Hub link a good idea? Should we mention that it's a stolen data site if we do? You were mentioned here $\endgroup$– uhohCommented Aug 16, 2019 at 1:26
-
1$\begingroup$ I downvoted for three reasons. (1) sci-hub is illegal in multiple countries. (2) Clicking on a sci-hub link that doesn't say NSFW (or at least sci-hub) can get me in trouble at work. (3) Because sci-hub is illegal in multiple countries, sci-hub is constantly being taken down (only to be resurrected elsewhere), making sci-hub links highly subject to link rot. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 2:39
-
1$\begingroup$ The problem isn't if the author of a question or answer lives in a country where it may be considered illegal. The problem is for readers of the question or answer. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 11:33