did I understand you correctly that you are saying:
because every body has its means of living (someone paying them an
income), just because of this, the fruits of his/her (crowd of them)
work may be used by third party for the profit?
On 2016-05-05 16:45, Susan Fowler wrote:
> Cochrane is not really free to anyone. In countries where people have
> "free" access including Australia, they have it because their government
> pays for it with taxes paid by citizens. Just like how the PubMed
> interface to the Medline database isn't really "free" since it is paid
> for with United States citizen tax dollars.Crowd sourcing isn't free
> either. That crowd is already an elite set of people since they have
> access to the internet and the hardware necessary to interact. Those
> people are employed by someone paying them an income or are supported
> by their government that supports their crowd sourcing contributions.
> Researchers are welcome to publish their content in reputable open
> source journals like PLOS and their institutions are happy to make their
> content digitally available in repositories. In the US, journals
> publishing reports funded with government money are required to make
> access to those reports free. We have plenty of avenues for sharing our
> content. We do not have to give up access and, these days, authors have
> options to negotiate author agreements with subscription journals to
> maintain access rights. If you need help figuring all of that out
> contact a librarian.
> If you want access to information for "free", it doesn't stop with
> university libraries, you can access content at your public libraries as
> well. You can even do it online with a "free" public library account.
> Even if your public library doesn't subscribe to a particular journal
> they can get it for you, usually at not cost to you outside of the taxes
> you have already paid to use the library in the first place.
> So when people complain about not having free access what are they
> really complaining about? Because from my point of view, it seems like
> there a lot of ways to access information for "free". If researchers get
> paid to conduct research and write articles reporting the results, who
> do we think pays the publishers to publish that content or the libraries
> and librarians who work very hard to make access as easy as possible?
> I don't think Cochrane is aiming to derive financial gains either but
> Cochrane doesn't just happen. Their are servers, content management,
> interface design etc... that has to happen and that is not free. Nothing
> is really free.
> Susan Fowler, MLIS
> Medical Librarian
> Coordinator, Systematic Review Services
Vasiliy V. Vlassov, MD
President, Society for Evidence Based Medicine (osdm.org)
e-mail: vlassov[a t]cochrane.ru
snail mail: P.O.Box 13 Moscow 109451 Russia
Phone Russia +7(965)2511021
Подпишись на новости на osdm.org
THANK YOU for deleting my e-mail address , any other addresses, and any
personal information, from this e-mail, if you plan to forward it.
Also, thank you for using “Bcc” instead of “To” and “Cc“ when initiating
both individual and group e-mails. These extra actions on your part
help to prevent spammers and hackers from obtaining addresses and thus
help prevent the proliferation of spam.