• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

学术盗版图书馆能否弥合知识获取鸿沟?全球和欧洲学术界图书盗版的结构条件的实证研究。

Can scholarly pirate libraries bridge the knowledge access gap? An empirical study on the structural conditions of book piracy in global and European academia.

机构信息

Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Independent researcher, The Netherlands.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Dec 3;15(12):e0242509. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242509. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0242509
PMID:33270680
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7714232/
Abstract

Library Genesis is one of the oldest and largest illegal scholarly book collections online. Without the authorization of copyright holders, this shadow library hosts and makes more than 2 million scholarly publications, monographs, and textbooks available. This paper analyzes a set of weblogs of one of the Library Genesis mirrors, provided to us by one of the service's administrators. We reconstruct the social and economic factors that drive the global and European demand for illicit scholarly literature. In particular, we test if lower income regions can compensate for the shortcomings in legal access infrastructures by more intensive use of illicit open resources. We found that while richer regions are the most intensive users of shadow libraries, poorer regions face structural limitations that prevent them from fully capitalizing on freely accessible knowledge. We discuss these findings in the wider context of open access publishing, and point out that open access knowledge, if not met with proper knowledge absorption infrastructures, has limited usefulness in addressing knowledge access and production inequalities.

摘要

LibGen 是历史最悠久、规模最大的在线非法学术书籍收藏馆之一。未经版权所有者授权,这个影子图书馆托管并提供了超过 200 万份学术出版物、专论和教科书。本文分析了 LibGen 镜像之一的一组博客,这是由该服务的管理员之一提供给我们的。我们重建了驱动全球和欧洲对非法学术文献需求的社会和经济因素。特别是,我们测试了低收入地区是否可以通过更密集地使用非法开放资源来弥补合法获取基础设施的不足。我们发现,虽然富裕地区是影子图书馆的最密集使用者,但较贫困地区面临结构性限制,使其无法充分利用免费获取的知识。我们在开放获取出版的更广泛背景下讨论了这些发现,并指出,如果没有适当的知识吸收基础设施,开放获取知识在解决知识获取和生产不平等方面的用处有限。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/0df3d3ad5c0c/pone.0242509.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/90e090c7f3b8/pone.0242509.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/ce35de738a16/pone.0242509.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/6b891436c641/pone.0242509.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/146ce1b3ad46/pone.0242509.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/60ab74914991/pone.0242509.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/0df3d3ad5c0c/pone.0242509.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/90e090c7f3b8/pone.0242509.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/ce35de738a16/pone.0242509.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/6b891436c641/pone.0242509.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/146ce1b3ad46/pone.0242509.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/60ab74914991/pone.0242509.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ea6/7714232/0df3d3ad5c0c/pone.0242509.g006.jpg

相似文献

1
Can scholarly pirate libraries bridge the knowledge access gap? An empirical study on the structural conditions of book piracy in global and European academia.学术盗版图书馆能否弥合知识获取鸿沟?全球和欧洲学术界图书盗版的结构条件的实证研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 3;15(12):e0242509. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242509. eCollection 2020.
2
Online medical books: their availability and an assessment of how health sciences libraries provide access on their public Websites.在线医学书籍:其可获取性以及对健康科学图书馆如何在其公共网站上提供访问途径的评估。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Jan;94(1):75-80.
3
How to identify peer-reviewed publications: Open-identity labels in scholarly book publishing.如何识别同行评审出版物:学术书籍出版中的开放身份标签。
PLoS One. 2019 Mar 25;14(3):e0214423. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214423. eCollection 2019.
4
Scientific Authors in a Changing World of Scholarly Communication: What Does the Future Hold?科学作者在不断变化的学术交流世界中:未来会怎样?
Am J Med. 2020 Jan;133(1):26-31. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2019.07.028. Epub 2019 Aug 13.
5
The case for an inclusive scholarly communication infrastructure for social sciences and humanities.支持建立一个包容的社会科学和人文学科学术交流基础架构。
F1000Res. 2020 Oct 22;9:1265. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.26545.1. eCollection 2020.
6
Some Thoughts on the Future of Libraries, Journals, Impact Factors, and Replicability.关于图书馆、期刊、影响因子及可重复性未来的一些思考
J Allied Health. 2016 Winter;45(4):235.
7
Scholarly Merit in a Global Context: The Nation Gap in Psychological Science.全球背景下的学术卓越:心理科学中的民族差距。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2017 Nov;12(6):1133-1137. doi: 10.1177/1745691617708233.
8
Independent, Publicly Funded Journals Adhering to Platinum Open Access Are the Future of Responsible Scholarly Publishing.坚持白金开放获取的独立、公共资助期刊是负责任学术出版的未来。
J Korean Med Sci. 2020 Feb 3;35(4):e13. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e13.
9
Open access: implications for scholarly publishing and medical libraries.开放获取:对学术出版和医学图书馆的影响
J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Jul;94(3):253-62.
10
Report from the Medical Library Association's InSight Initiative Summit 1: Engaging Users in a Disruptive Era.医学图书馆协会洞察计划峰会1报告:在颠覆性时代吸引用户
J Med Libr Assoc. 2018 Oct;106(4):554-572. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2018.561. Epub 2018 Oct 1.

引用本文的文献

1
Dentists' Self-evaluated Ability in Diagnosing and Updating About Pulpotomy.牙医对活髓切断术的诊断和更新能力的自我评估。
Int Dent J. 2023 Apr;73(2):319-324. doi: 10.1016/j.identj.2022.03.002. Epub 2022 Apr 5.

本文引用的文献

1
Huge US university cancels subscription with Elsevier.美国大型大学取消与爱思唯尔的订阅。
Nature. 2019 Mar;567(7746):15-16. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-00758-x.
2
Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature.Sci-Hub 提供几乎所有学术文献的访问途径。
Elife. 2018 Mar 1;7:e32822. doi: 10.7554/eLife.32822.
3
Poor Access for African Researchers to African Emergency Care Publications: A Cross-sectional Study.非洲研究人员获取非洲急诊护理出版物的机会匮乏:一项横断面研究。
West J Emerg Med. 2017 Oct;18(6):1018-1024. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2017.8.34930. Epub 2017 Sep 11.
4
Looking into Pandora's Box: The Content of and its Usage.窥探潘多拉魔盒:其内容及用途
F1000Res. 2017 Apr 21;6:541. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.11366.1. eCollection 2017.
5
Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone.谁在下载盗版论文?所有人。
Science. 2016 Apr 29;352(6285):508-12. doi: 10.1126/science.352.6285.508. Epub 2016 Apr 28.
6
The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era.数字时代学术出版商的寡头垄断
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 10;10(6):e0127502. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127502. eCollection 2015.
7
The impact of free access to the scientific literature: a review of recent research.免费获取科学文献的影响:近期研究综述。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2011 Jul;99(3):208-17. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.99.3.008.