Sci-Hub blocked in Russia following ruling by Moscow court | News | Chemistry World

Sci-Hub, the popular pirate site that bypasses paywalls to illicitly host millions of pay-to-read scientific papers, is being blocked in Russia after a court in the country ruled against the site.

Last month, the Moscow City Court ruled that Sci-Hub should be blocked in the country following complaints from the academic publishers Elsevier and Springer Nature, who alleged intellectual property infringement. As a result, Russia’s state media regulator Roskomnadzor (RKN) has blocked Sci-Hub and related mirror sites. It is believed that Alexandra Elbakyan, who founded Sci-Hub in 2011, operates the site out of Russia. Elbakyan did not respond to a request for comment….”

G-8 Leaders Communique (June 18, 2013)

“Open government data are an essential resource of the information age. Moving data into the public sphere can improve the lives of citizens, and increasing access to these data can drive innovation, economic growth and the creation of good jobs. Making government data publicly available by default and reusable free of charge in machine-readable, readily-accessible, open formats, and describing these data clearly so that the public can readily understand their contents and meanings, generates new fuel for innovation by private sector innovators, entrepreneurs, and non-governmental organisations. Open data also increase awareness about how countries’ natural resources are used, how extractives revenues are spent, and how land is transacted and managed.

47. We have today agreed and published an Open Data Charter (annexed) with the following principles:

Open Data by Default – foster expectations that government data be published openly while continuing to safeguard privacy;

Quality and Quantity – release quality, timely and well described open data;

Useable by All – release as much data in as many open formats as possible;

Releasing Data for Improved Governance – share expertise and be transparent about data collection, standards and publishing processes;

Releasing Data for Innovation – consult with users and empower future generations of innovators….

We will publish individual action plans detailing how we will implement the Open Data Charter according to our national frameworks (October 2013)…[for example] Genome data, research and educational activity, experiment results….”

In Italy, only 46% of the research is “open”

“What happens when science becomes open? And what drives researchers to publicize scientific articles where they have the result of their work? It is from these two questions that has taken the International survey of scientific authors (Issa), a project devoted to the OECD by Brunella Boselli and Fernando Galindo-Rueda. 

A research involving over 6,000 researchers who responded to a questionnaire sent by email at the end of 2014. With the goal of measuring the spread of openness, it is the choice to freely publish research results. And the result is that between 50 and 55% of publications are available in open format within three or four years of publication. A choice, that of open access, widespread in emerging economies.

In Indonesia it is over 90%, in Thailand 80, in Turkey 70%. And even though it is limited to the more mature economies, South Korea is the 66%, followed by Brazil with 64 and Russia with 61. In Italy, however, only 46% of the research is published in open format….”

ResearchGate: Disseminating, Communicating and Measuring Scholarship?

Abstract:  ResearchGate is a social network site for academics to create their own profiles, list their 

publications and interact with each other. Like Academia.edu, it provides a new way for 
scholars to disseminate their publications and hence potentially changes the dynamics of 
informal scholarly communication. This article assesses whether ResearchGate usage and 
publication data broadly reflect existing academic hierarchies and whether individual 
countries are set to benefit or lose out from the site. The results show that rankings based 
on ResearchGate statistics correlate moderately well with other rankings of academic 
institutions, suggesting that ResearchGate use broadly reflects traditional academic 
capital. Moreover, while Brazil, India and some other countries seem to be 
disproportionately taking advantage of ResearchGate, academics in China, South Korea 
and Russia may be missing opportunities to use ResearchGate to maximise the academic 
impact of their publications.