Bypass Paywalls Clean – Get this Extension for ? Firefox (en-GB)

“Add-on allows you to read articles from websites that implement a paywall.

Not everyone is able to afford multiple subscriptions on many different news sites, especially when they just want to read a single article (from Twitter) without being enrolled in a monthly/yearly membership.

Notice: if you use this add-on regularly on the same website, please consider paying a subscription for it. Don’t forget that free press can’t be sustainable without funding….”

COVID research is free to access — but for how long?

“Scientific papers made free to access during the pandemic are rumoured to be disappearing behind paywalls. They aren’t — yet….

Now the pandemic is in its third year, and reports are circulating that the end of free-to-access COVID-19 research is nigh. If so, that would suggest publishers have decided that the COVID-19 emergency is over before world health authorities have. But is that the case?…

Nature has so far found only one publisher that has paywalled some previously free research papers. BMJ, based in London, decided this year to make COVID-19 research from most of its journals free for only one year from their publication date. But that policy does not include COVID-19 papers in flagship medical journal The BMJ, where no time limit applies, the publisher told Nature….

Spokespeople from other publishers — including the giants Elsevier, Springer Nature and Wiley — told Nature that they are keeping their COVID-19 research papers free. (Nature’s news team is editorially independent of Springer Nature, its publisher.) The US National Library of Medicine in Bethesda, Maryland, which runs the PubMed Central repository, told Nature that it has not received any requests to withdraw the free versions of COVID-19 papers that many publishers have placed there….

In his August post, Kiley observed that publishers have now agreed four times in seven years to open up paywalled research for public-health emergencies — for Zika, Ebola, COVID-19 and, earlier this year, for monkeypox. He urged that open access shouldn’t be “dictated by the perceived urgency of a disease”, but should apply to all research. The world faces other challenges, such as climate change and food and water security, he noted. Also in August, supporters of open-access research launched a multi-year campaign to make climate and biodiversity research free in perpetuity….”

What do participants think of our research practices? An examination of behavioural psychology participants’ preferences | Royal Society Open Science

Abstract:  What research practices should be considered acceptable? Historically, scientists have set the standards for what constitutes acceptable research practices. However, there is value in considering non-scientists’ perspectives, including research participants’. 1873 participants from MTurk and university subject pools were surveyed after their participation in one of eight minimal-risk studies. We asked participants how they would feel if (mostly) common research practices were applied to their data: p-hacking/cherry-picking results, selective reporting of studies, Hypothesizing After Results are Known (HARKing), committing fraud, conducting direct replications, sharing data, sharing methods, and open access publishing. An overwhelming majority of psychology research participants think questionable research practices (e.g. p-hacking, HARKing) are unacceptable (68.3–81.3%), and were supportive of practices to increase transparency and replicability (71.4–80.1%). A surprising number of participants expressed positive or neutral views toward scientific fraud (18.7%), raising concerns about data quality. We grapple with this concern and interpret our results in light of the limitations of our study. Despite the ambiguity in our results, we argue that there is evidence (from our study and others’) that researchers may be violating participants’ expectations and should be transparent with participants about how their data will be used.



Mozilla adds tiered subscription plans to MDN Web Docs • The Register

“The Mozilla Developer Network, which hosts free, open access to web standard documentation, tools, samples and other good stuff, is going pay-for-play with a premium subscription plan that adds new personalization features. 

The Firefox maker announced today the subscription service, called MDN Plus, saying it will add three features for paid MDN users at launch: Notifications, collections, and MDN Offline….”

Toll-based access vs pirate access: a webometric study of academic publishers | Emerald Insight

Abstract:  Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to draw a comparison of the Web traffic ranking, usage and popularity of websites of databases of reputed publishers, namely, ScienceDirect and Emerald Insight, that provide access on subscription basis with Sci-Hub, on the basis of data obtained from Alexa databank ( Sci-Hub is a website that provides pirated open-access to the research literature, where piracy, according to The Economic Times (2020), refers to the unauthorized duplication of copyrighted content.


Under present study, the quantitative study of the collected data was carried out with help of descriptive research methodology. The Alexa databank was singled out as the source of data. This study crawled through Alexa databank on 01.12.2019 and collected relevant data regarding Sci-Hub, ScienceDirect and Emerald Insight using the search terms, and sequentially. Different criteria were taken into consideration, which include global traffic rank, the average number of page views per user, time taken for uploading, bounce rate, percentage of users, the number of in-links and daily time spent on the site.


The results of this study showed that ScienceDirect has the highest traffic rank and in-linking sites among the surveyed databases. But highest number of page visits were recorded for Sci-Hub with fastest downloading speed. It has also been observed that the users spent less time on ScienceDirect and Emerald Insight as compared to Sci-Hub. This study further observed that Sci-Hub has the lowest bounce rate. Users from both the developing and developed economies use the Sci-Hub, though the highest number of visitors belongs to the developing nations.


This study provides an overview of the performance of toll-based publishing databases with pirated database based on different criteria through World Wide Web. Though, this study in no way supports or endorses the unauthorized and illegal access to knowledge, but such data helps in depicting and analyzing how much a particular database is accessed by its users all over the globe and also determines and illustrates the time spent by users while accessing a specific database, thus, providing the user preferences in information seeking activities. This study provides an overall view of adoption of open resources.

RSC Select: One token. One article download

“RSC Select gives you on-demand access to groundbreaking research in the chemical sciences without being tied to a subscription.

An RSC Select token is valid for two years, and buys you one article download. Tokens can be used on any article, published in any Royal Society of Chemistry journal since 1841….

One token is around £42.50 ($64.60)….”

Paywalls Everywhere You Go? Get to the Goodies With These Two Paywall Ladder Bookmarklets – ResearchBuzz

“The thing about a lot of the news behind paywalls is that it doesn’t stay behind paywalls. It gets syndicated, sometimes to paywall-free sources. Most stories, even those paywalled, have a paragraph or so of content. To find these articles elsewhere, you could easily copy a phrase and then look for it in Google News. Or you could make a couple of bookmarklets and have a one-click, instant search for different case scenarios.


In this article we’re going for the latter option: two bookmarklets that will help you get to articles you can’t access otherwise. They won’t work 100% of the time, but I think you’ll be surprised at how short some of those paywalls are….”

IEEE – IEEE and Edge Announce Partnership to Enhance Research Data Management and Collaboration with IEEE DataPort

“Edge, a nonprofit research and education network and technology partner, has announced a partnership with IEEE, the world’s largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for humanity. The two organizations will collaborate to offer increased awareness of institutional subscriptions to IEEE DataPort — a web-based, cloud services platform supporting the data-related needs of the global technical community — making it available to academic, government, and not-for-profit institutions across the United States.

IEEE DataPort provides a unified data and collaboration platform which researchers can leverage to efficiently store, share, access, and manage research data, accelerating institutional research efforts. Researchers at subscribing institutions will gain access to the more than 2,500 research datasets available on the platform and the ability to collaborate with more than 1.25 million IEEE DataPort users worldwide. The platform also enables institutions to meet funding agency requirements for the use of and sharing of data….”

Climate change: ‘Glasgow Agreement’ can save the planet but locking scientific research behind paywalls is holding us back – Catherine Stihler | The Scotsman

“We have seen the incredible value of open research in addressing the Covid crisis. After researchers sequenced the viral genome and shared it freely online, it ultimately led to the development of life-saving vaccines.

The same approach to the Covid emergency must apply to the climate emergency.”

Why Is Access to the Scholarly Journal Literature So Expensive?

“For more than 30 years the spiraling costs of scholarly journal subscriptions, often called the “serials crisis,” have been a hotly debated topic. Academics and librarians have pointed out the high profit levels of the major commercial publishers, despite that the content they sell is provided by unpaid authors and reviewers. The publishers then resell it to the universities of these same authors and reviewers. Publishers have attempted to justify their prices by cost increases, their investments in information technology, and the value they add. A useful framework for understanding the situation is Michael Porter’s five forces model for explaining the competitive conditions in an industry. Despite claims to the contrary, the degree of market concentration in scholarly publishing is not higher than that in many other industries, and it is not the main cause of the problem. But because the big deals of different publishers are complements rather than substitutes, the leading companies essentially do not compete for customers, in contrast to other industries, such as mobile phones or automobiles. The high barriers to new entrants, partly due to journal ranking lists and impact factors, as well as the low bargaining power of suppliers and customers, explain why this industry has been so well shielded from the disruptive forces of the Internet. The protected competitive position and high profitability are also major reasons why the big subscription publishers have been slow to adopt the open access business model….”

Computational Access and Use of Texts and Data behind Paywalls: Challenges and Resources – MIT Events

“The rise of applied data science, digital humanities, machine learning, and artificial intelligence has resulted in an increased need for computational access and reuse of research data and publications, many of which are only available behind paywalls and governed by restrictive terms of use. 

What can you do with proprietary sources, how do you gain access, and how can you make your own research output from such sources shareable are questions that many are asking. 

Join experts Katie Zimmerman, Laura Hanscom, and Ye Li from the MIT Libraries in this session to learn about the copyright and contractual implications of paywalled data sources and how you can use them and share your results….”

Paywalls, Newsletters, and the New Echo Chamber | WIRED

If the paywall sites are going to attract more consumers, and provide them safe harbor from the free-news vortex, then Radcliffe says they’ll need to make a better case for why it’s worth the money. That means letting people know the actual cost of producing journalism, and what’s at risk if you don’t financially support it. Otherwise, big publications will only serve a minority of the population, small publications will struggle to survive, and people who have grown accustomed to free news will continue to seek it out, even if it ends up not really being news at all.

Remote access to Taylor & Francis Online made easier with SeamlessAccess – Taylor & Francis Newsroom

“Accessing research through an institutional subscription using SAML authentication (Shibboleth and OpenAthens) is now more straightforward with the introduction of SeamlessAccess on Taylor & Francis Online.

SeamlessAccess automatically recognizes if you have previously logged into Taylor & Francis Online using Shibboleth or OpenAthens and presents your previously used institution as the first option, removing the need to manually search each and every time you want to access journal research articles.

The feature not only works on Taylor & Francis Online but follows you across all participating publisher platforms. So, if you have logged into your institution on another participating publishing platform and then switch to another also using SeamlessAccess, your institutional choice will be carried with you. This works even if you’re visiting a publisher platform for the first time….”

Paywall: The Business of Scholarship

Paywall: The Business of Scholarship is a documentary which focuses on the need for open access to research and science. The film questions the rationale behind the $25.2 billion a year that flows into for-profit academic publishers, examines the 35-40% profit margin associated with the top academic publisher, Elsevier, and looks at how that profit margin is often greater than some of the most profitable tech companies such as Apple, Facebook, and Google. 

Structural inequalities in scholarly communications

“However, there are significant drawbacks to electronic resources:

Electronic versions of scholarly materials are subject to licenses, which often put strict limitations on who can use them. Libraries can share print materials by sending them through interlibrary loan — mailing materials to those who need them — but not all e-journal content can be shared this way. E-books usually can’t be shared between libraries, meaning that they are available only to those who have a current affiliation with the University or those who can physically visit one of our spaces.
E-materials are expensive and often do not have the “friendliest” terms. Multi-user licenses are not always available or may be prohibitively expensive. In a time when University budgets are facing large cuts, it is hard to accept that a print volume may cost $100, yet the multi-user e-version might cost $900.
Electronic materials also often lack perpetual access. This may mean that the same materials have to be purchased multiple times.
Access to electronic materials also requires access to the internet — stable broadband access. This is often lacking for scholars all over the world; even in the United States, it is estimated that only three-quarters of adults have broadband internet service at home….”