Search This Blog

Monday, March 9, 2020

Aaron Swartz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Aaron Swartz
Swartz smiling
Swartz at a meetup in August 2009
Born
Aaron Hillel Swartz

November 8, 1986
DiedJanuary 11, 2013 (aged 26)
Brooklyn, New York City, U.S.
Cause of deathSuicide by hanging
Alma materStanford University
OccupationSoftware developer, writer, internet activist
OrganizationCreative Commons (development), Reddit (co-founder), Watchdog.net, Open Library, DeadDrop, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Demand Progress (co-founder), ThoughtWorks, Tor2web
TitleFellow, Harvard University Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics
AwardsArsDigita Prize (2000)
American Library Association's James Madison Award (posthumously)
EFF Pioneer Award 2013 (posthumously)
Internet Hall of Fame 2013 (posthumously)
Websiteaaronsw.com

Aaron Hillel Swartz (November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013) was an American computer programmer, entrepreneur, writer, political organizer, and Internet hacktivist. He was involved in the development of the web feed format RSS, the Markdown publishing format, the organization Creative Commons, and the website framework web.py, and was a co-founder of the social news site Reddit. He was given the title of co-founder by Y Combinator owner Paul Graham after the formation of Not a Bug, Inc. (a merger of Swartz's project Infogami and Reddit, a company run by Alexis Ohanian and Steve Huffman).

Swartz's work also focused on civic awareness and activism. He helped launch the Progressive Change Campaign Committee in 2009 to learn more about effective online activism. In 2010, he became a research fellow at Harvard University's Safra Research Lab on Institutional Corruption, directed by Lawrence Lessig. He founded the online group Demand Progress, known for its campaign against the Stop Online Piracy Act.

In 2011, Swartz was arrested by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) police on state breaking-and-entering charges, after connecting a computer to the MIT network in an unmarked and unlocked closet, and setting it to download academic journal articles systematically from JSTOR using a guest user account issued to him by MIT. Federal prosecutors later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and eleven violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution, and supervised release.

Swartz declined a plea bargain under which he would have served six months in federal prison. Two days after the prosecution rejected a counter-offer by Swartz, he was found dead in his Brooklyn apartment, where he had hanged himself.

In 2013, Swartz was inducted posthumously into the Internet Hall of Fame.

Early life

Swartz in 2002 with Lawrence Lessig at the launch party for Creative Commons
 
Swartz describes the nature of the shift from centralized one-to-many systems to the decentralized many-to-many topology of network communication. San Francisco, April 2007 (9:29)
 
Swartz was born in Highland Park, Illinois (a suburb of Chicago), the eldest son of Jewish parents Susan and Robert Swartz and brother of Noah and Benjamin. His father had founded the software firm Mark Williams Company. Swartz immersed himself in the study of computers, programming, the Internet, and Internet culture. He attended North Shore Country Day School, a small private school near Chicago, until 9th grade. Swartz left high school in the 10th grade, and enrolled in courses at Lake Forest College.

In 1999, when he was 13 years old he created the website Theinfo.org, a collaborative online library. Theinfo.org made Swartz the winner of the ArsDigita Prize, given to young people who create "useful, educational, and collaborative" noncommercial websites. At age 14, he became a member of the working group that authored the RSS 1.0 web syndication specification.

Swartz attended Stanford University, but dropped out after his first year.

Entrepreneurship

During Swartz's first year at Stanford, he applied to Y Combinator's very first Summer Founders Program, proposing to work on a startup called Infogami, designed as a flexible content management system to allow the creation of rich and visually interesting websites or a form of wiki for structured data. After working on Infogami with co-founder Simon Carstensen over the summer of 2005, Aaron opted not to return to Stanford, choosing instead to continue to develop and seek funding for Infogami.

As part of his work on Infogami, Swartz created the web.py web application framework because he was unhappy with other available systems in the Python programming language. In early fall of 2005, Swartz worked with his fellow co-founders of another nascent Y-Combinator firm Reddit, to rewrite Reddit's Lisp codebase using Python and web.py. Although Infogami's platform was abandoned after Not a Bug was acquired, Infogami's software was used to support the Internet Archive's Open Library project and the web.py web framework was used as basis for many other projects by Swartz and many others.

When Infogami failed to find further funding, Y-Combinator organizers suggested that Infogami merge with Reddit, which it did in November 2005, resulting in the formation of a new firm, Not a Bug, devoted to promoting both products. As a result of this merger, Swartz was given the title of co-founder of Reddit. Although both projects initially struggled to gain traction, Reddit began to make large gains in popularity in 2005 and 2006.

In October 2006, based largely on the success of Reddit, Not a Bug was acquired by Condé Nast Publications, the owner of Wired magazine. Swartz moved with his company to San Francisco to work on Wired. Swartz found office life uncongenial, and he ultimately left the company. In September 2007, Swartz joined with Infogami co-founder Simon Carstensen to launch a new firm, Jottit, in another attempt to create another markdown driven content management system in Python.

Activism

In 2008, Swartz founded Watchdog.net, "the good government site with teeth," to aggregate and visualize data about politicians. In the same year, he wrote a widely circulated Guerilla Open Access Manifesto. On December 27, 2010, Swartz filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to learn about the treatment of Chelsea Manning, alleged source for WikiLeaks.

PACER

In 2008, Swartz downloaded about 2.7 million federal court documents stored in the PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) database managed by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

The Huffington Post characterized his actions this way: "Swartz downloaded public court documents from the PACER system in an effort to make them available outside of the expensive service. The move drew the attention of the FBI, which ultimately decided not to press charges as the documents were, in fact, public."

PACER was charging 8 cents per page for information that Carl Malamud, who founded the nonprofit group Public.Resource.Org, contended should be free, because federal documents are not covered by copyright. The fees were "plowed back to the courts to finance technology, but the system [ran] a budget surplus of some $150 million, according to court reports," reported The New York Times. PACER used technology that was "designed in the bygone days of screechy telephone modems ... putting the nation's legal system behind a wall of cash and kludge." Malamud appealed to fellow activists, urging them to visit one of 17 libraries conducting a free trial of the PACER system, download court documents, and send them to him for public distribution.

After reading Malamud's call for action, Swartz used a Perl computer script running on Amazon cloud servers to download the documents, using credentials belonging to a Sacramento library. From September 4 to 20, 2008, it accessed documents and uploaded them to a cloud computing service. He released the documents to Malamud's organization.

On September 29, 2008, the GPO suspended the free trial, "pending an evaluation" of the program. Swartz's actions were subsequently investigated by the FBI. The case was closed after two months with no charges filed. Swartz learned the details of the investigation as a result of filing a FOIA request with the FBI and described their response as the "usual mess of confusions that shows the FBI's lack of sense of humor." PACER still charges per page, but customers using Firefox have the option of saving the documents for free public access with a plug-in called RECAP.

At a 2013 memorial for Swartz, Malamud recalled their work with PACER. They brought millions of U.S. District Court records out from behind PACER's "pay wall", he said, and found them full of privacy violations, including medical records and the names of minor children and confidential informants.
We sent our results to the Chief Judges of 31 District Courts ... They redacted those documents and they yelled at the lawyers that filed them ... The Judicial Conference changed their privacy rules. ... [To] the bureaucrats who ran the Administrative Office of the United States Courts ... we were thieves that took $1.6 million of their property. So they called the FBI ... [The FBI] found nothing wrong ...
Malamud penned a more detailed account of his collaboration with Swartz on the Pacer project in an essay that appears on his website.

Writing in Ars Technica, Timothy Lee, who later made use of the documents obtained by Swartz as a co-creator of RECAP, offered some insight into discrepancies in reporting on just how much data Swartz had downloaded: "In a back-of-the-envelope calculation a few days before the offsite crawl was shut down, Swartz guessed he got around 25 percent of the documents in PACER. The New York Times similarly reported Swartz had downloaded "an estimated 20 percent of the entire database". Based on the facts that Swartz downloaded 2.7 million documents while PACER, at the time, contained 500 million, Lee concluded that Swartz downloaded less than one percent of the database.

Progressive Change Campaign Committee

In 2009, wanting to learn about effective activism, Swartz helped launch the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. He wrote on his blog, "I spend my days experimenting with new ways to get progressive policies enacted and progressive politicians elected." Swartz led the first activism event of his career with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, delivering thousands of "Honor Kennedy" petition signatures to Massachusetts legislators asking them to fulfill former Senator Ted Kennedy's last wish by appointing a senator to vote for health care reform.

Demand Progress

In 2010,[54] Swartz co-founded Demand Progress, a political advocacy group that organizes people online to "take action by contacting Congress and other leaders, funding pressure tactics, and spreading the word" about civil liberties, government reform, and other issues.

During academic year 2010–11, Swartz conducted research studies on political corruption as a Lab Fellow in Harvard University's Edmond J. Safra Research Lab on Institutional Corruption.

Author Cory Doctorow, in his novel Homeland, "drew on advice from Swartz in setting out how his protagonist could use the information now available about voters to create a grass-roots anti-establishment political campaign." In an afterword to the novel, Swartz wrote, "these political hacktivist tools can be used by anyone motivated and talented enough.... Now it's up to you to change the system. ... Let me know if I can help."

Stopping the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)

Swartz in 2012 protesting against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)

Swartz was involved in the campaign to prevent passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which sought to combat Internet copyright violations but was criticized on the basis that it would have made it easier for the U.S. government to shut down web sites accused of violating copyright and would have placed intolerable burdens on Internet providers. Following the defeat of the bill, Swartz was the keynote speaker at the F2C:Freedom to Connect 2012 event in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2012. His speech was titled "How We Stopped SOPA" and he informed the audience:
This bill ... shut down whole websites. Essentially, it stopped Americans from communicating entirely with certain groups....
I called all my friends, and we stayed up all night setting up a website for this new group, Demand Progress, with an online petition opposing this noxious bill.... We [got] ... 300,000 signers.... We met with the staff of members of Congress and pleaded with them.... And then it passed unanimously....
And then, suddenly, the process stopped. Senator Ron Wyden ... put a hold on the bill.
He added, "We won this fight because everyone made themselves the hero of their own story. Everyone took it as their job to save this crucial freedom." He was referring to a series of protests against the bill by numerous websites that was described by the Electronic Frontier Foundation as the biggest in Internet history, with over 115,000 sites altering their webpages. Swartz also presented on this topic at an event organized by ThoughtWorks.

Wikipedia

Swartz at 2009 Boston Wikipedia Meetup
 
Swartz participated in Wikipedia from August 2003. In 2006, he ran unsuccessfully for the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.

In 2006, Swartz wrote an analysis of how Wikipedia articles are written, and concluded that the bulk of the actual content comes from tens of thousands of occasional contributors, or "outsiders", each of whom made few other contributions to the site, while a core group of 500 to 1,000 regular editors tend to correct spelling and other formatting errors. According to Swartz: "the formatters aid the contributors, not the other way around." His conclusions, based on the analysis of edit histories of several randomly selected articles, contradicted the opinion of Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, who believed the core group of regular editors were providing most of the content while thousands of others contributed to formatting issues. Swartz came to his conclusions by counting the total number of characters added by an editor to a particular article, while Wales counted the total number of edits.

United States v. Aaron Swartz case

According to state and federal authorities, Swartz used JSTOR, a digital repository, to download a large number of academic journal articles through MIT's computer network over the course of a few weeks in late 2010 and early 2011. At the time, Swartz was a research fellow at Harvard University, which provided him with a JSTOR account. Visitors to MIT's "open campus" were authorized to access JSTOR through its network.

The authorities said Swartz downloaded the documents through a laptop connected to a networking switch in a controlled-access wiring closet at MIT. The door to the closet was kept unlocked, according to press reports. When discovered, a video camera was placed in the room to film Swartz and his computer was left untouched. Once a video of Swartz was recorded, the download was stopped and he was identified. Rather than pursue a civil lawsuit against him, in June 2011 they reached a settlement wherein he surrendered the downloaded data.

Response from JSTOR

On September 25, 2010, the IP address 18.55.6.215, part of the MIT network, began sending hundreds of PDF download requests per minute and was affecting the performance of the entire JSTOR site. This prompted a block of the IP address. In the morning, another IP address, also from within the MIT network, began sending JSTOR more PDF download requests, resulting in a temporary full block on the firewall level of all MIT servers in the entire 18.0.0.0/8 range. An email was then sent to MIT, describing the situation:

From an email sent on September 29, 2010, one JSTOR employee wrote to MIT:
note that this was an extreme case. We typically suspend just one individual IP at a time and do that relatively infrequently (perhaps 6 on a busy day, from 7000+ institutional subscribers). In this case, we saw a performance hit on the live site, which I have only seen about 3 or 4 times in my 5 years here. The pattern used was to create a new session for each PDF download or every few, which was terribly efficient, but not terribly subtle. In the end, we saw over 200K sessions in one hour's time during the peak.
— NAME REDACTED, JSTOR
On July 30, 2013, JSTOR released 300 partially redacted documents, which had been provided as incriminating evidence against Aaron Swartz. These documents were originally sent to the United States Attorney's Office in response to subpoenas in the case United States v. Aaron Swartz.

Arrest and prosecution

On the night of January 6, 2011, Swartz was arrested near the Harvard campus by MIT police and a United States Secret Service agent. He was arraigned in Cambridge District Court on two state charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony.

On July 11, 2011, Swartz was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer.

On November 17, 2011, Swartz was indicted by a Middlesex County Superior Court grand jury on state charges of breaking and entering with intent, grand larceny, and unauthorized access to a computer network. On December 16, 2011, state prosecutors filed a notice that they were dropping the two original charges; the charges listed in the November 17, 2011, indictment were dropped on March 8, 2012. According to a spokesperson for the Middlesex County prosecutor, the state charges were dropped to permit a federal prosecution headed by Stephen P. Heymann and supported by evidence provided by Secret Service agent Michael S. Pickett to proceed unimpeded.

On September 12, 2012, federal prosecutors filed a superseding indictment adding nine more felony counts, which increased Swartz's maximum criminal exposure to 50 years of imprisonment and $1 million in fines. During plea negotiations with Swartz's attorneys, the prosecutors offered to recommend a sentence of six months in a low-security prison, if Swartz would plead guilty to 13 federal crimes. Swartz and his lead attorney rejected that deal, opting instead for a trial in which prosecutors would have been forced to justify their pursuit of Swartz.

The federal prosecution involved what was characterized by numerous critics (such as former Nixon White House counsel John Dean) as an "overcharging" 13-count indictment and "overzealous" prosecution for alleged computer crimes, brought by then U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz.

Swartz died of suicide on January 11, 2013. After his death, federal prosecutors dropped the charges. On December 4, 2013, due to a Freedom of Information Act suit by the investigations editor of Wired magazine, several documents related to the case were released by the Secret Service, including a video of Swartz entering the MIT network closet.

Death, funeral, and memorial gatherings

Death

On the evening of January 11, 2013, Swartz's girlfriend, Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, found him dead in his Brooklyn apartment. A spokeswoman for New York's Medical Examiner reported that he had hanged himself. No suicide note was found. Swartz's family and his partner created a memorial website on which they issued a statement, saying: "He used his prodigious skills as a programmer and technologist not to enrich himself but to make the Internet and the world a fairer, better place."

Days before Swartz's funeral, Lawrence Lessig eulogized his friend and sometime-client in an essay, Prosecutor as Bully. He decried the disproportionality of Swartz's prosecution and said, "The question this government needs to answer is why it was so necessary that Aaron Swartz be labeled a 'felon'. For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept." Cory Doctorow wrote, "Aaron had an unbeatable combination of political insight, technical skill, and intelligence about people and issues. I think he could have revolutionized American (and worldwide) politics. His legacy may still yet do so."

Funeral and memorial gatherings

Swartz's funeral services were held on January 15, 2013, at Central Avenue Synagogue in Highland Park, Illinois. Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the World Wide Web, delivered a eulogy. The same day, The Wall Street Journal published a story based in part on an interview with Stinebrickner-Kauffman. She told the Journal that Swartz lacked the money to pay for a trial and "it was too hard for him to ... make that part of his life go public" by asking for help. He was also distressed, she said, because two of his friends had just been subpoenaed and because he no longer believed that MIT would try to stop the prosecution.

Several memorials followed soon afterward. On January 19, hundreds attended a memorial at the Cooper Union, speakers at which included Stinebrickner-Kauffman, open source advocate Doc Searls, Creative Commons' Glenn Otis Brown, journalist Quinn Norton, Roy Singham of ThoughtWorks, and David Segal of Demand Progress. On January 24, there was a memorial at the Internet Archive with speakers including Stinebrickner-Kauffman, Alex Stamos, Brewster Kahle, and Carl Malamud. On February 4, a memorial was held in the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill; speakers at this memorial included Senator Ron Wyden and Representatives Darrell Issa, Alan Grayson, and Jared Polis, and other lawmakers in attendance included Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representatives Zoe Lofgren and Jan Schakowsky. A memorial also took place on March 12 at the MIT Media Lab.

Swartz's family recommended GiveWell for donations in his memory, an organization that Swartz admired, had collaborated with and was the sole beneficiary of his will.

Response

Family response

Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death.
—Statement by family and partner of Aaron Swartz[125]
On January 12, 2013, Swartz's family and partner issued a statement criticizing the prosecutors and MIT.[125] Speaking at his son's funeral on January 15, Robert Swartz said, "Aaron was killed by the government, and MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."[126]
Tom Dolan, husband of U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz, whose office prosecuted Swartz's case, replied with criticism of the Swartz family: "Truly incredible that in their own son's obit they blame others for his death and make no mention of the 6-month offer." This comment triggered some criticism; Esquire writer Charlie Pierce replied, "the glibness with which her husband and her defenders toss off a 'mere' six months in federal prison, low-security or not, is a further indication that something is seriously out of whack with the way our prosecutors think these days."

MIT

MIT maintains an open-campus policy along with an "open network." Two days after Swartz's death, MIT President L. Rafael Reif commissioned professor Hal Abelson to lead an analysis of MIT's options and decisions relating to Swartz's "legal struggles." To help guide the fact-finding stage of the review, MIT created a website where community members could suggest questions and issues for the review to address.

Swartz's attorneys requested that all pretrial discovery documents be made public, a move which MIT opposed. Swartz allies have criticized MIT for its opposition to releasing the evidence without redactions. On July 26, 2013, the Abelson panel submitted a 182-page report to MIT president, L. Rafael Reif, who authorized its public release on July 30. The panel reported that MIT had not supported charges against Swartz and cleared the institution of wrongdoing. However, its report also noted that despite MIT's advocacy for open access culture at the institutional level and beyond, the university never extended that support to Swartz. The report revealed, for example, that while MIT considered the possibility of issuing a public statement about its position on the case, such a statement never materialized.

Press

Aaron Swartz mural by Brooklyn graffiti artist BAMN

The Huffington Post reported that "Ortiz has faced significant backlash for pursuing the case against Swartz, including a petition to the White House to have her fired." Other news outlets reported similarly.

Reuters news agency called Swartz "an online icon" who "help[ed] to make a virtual mountain of information freely available to the public, including an estimated 19 million pages of federal court documents." The Associated Press (AP) reported that Swartz's case "highlights society's uncertain, evolving view of how to treat people who break into computer systems and share data not to enrich themselves, but to make it available to others," and that JSTOR's lawyer, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Mary Jo White, had asked the lead prosecutor to drop the charges.

As discussed by editor Hrag Vartanian in Hyperallergic, Brooklyn, New York, muralist BAMN ("By Any Means Necessary") created a mural of Swartz. "Swartz was an amazing human being who fought tirelessly for our right to a free and open Internet," the artist explained. "He was much more than just the 'Reddit guy'." 

Speaking on April 17, 2013, Yuval Noah Harari described Swartz as "the first martyr of the Freedom of Information movement."

Aaron Swartz's legacy has been reported as strengthening the open access to scholarship movement. In Illinois, his home state, Swartz's influence led state university faculties to adopt policies in favor of open access.

Internet

Hacks

On January 13, 2013, members of Anonymous hacked two websites on the MIT domain, replacing them with tributes to Swartz that called on members of the Internet community to use his death as a rallying point for the open access movement. The banner included a list of demands for improvements in the U.S. copyright system, along with Swartz's Guerilla Open Access Manifesto. On the night of January 18, 2013, MIT's e-mail system was taken offline for ten hours. On January 22, e-mail sent to MIT was redirected by hackers Aush0k and TibitXimer to the Korea Advanced Institute of Science & Technology. All other traffic to MIT was redirected to a computer at Harvard University that was publishing a statement headed "R.I.P Aaron Swartz," with text from a 2009 posting by Swartz, accompanied by a chiptune version of "The Star-Spangled Banner". MIT regained full control after about seven hours. In the early hours of January 26, 2013, the U.S. Sentencing Commission website, USSC.gov, was hacked by Anonymous. The home page was replaced with an embedded YouTube video, Anonymous Operation Last Resort. The video statement said Swartz "faced an impossible choice". A hacker downloaded "hundreds of thousands" of scientific-journal articles from a Swiss publisher's website and republished them on the open Web in Swartz's honor a week before the first anniversary of his death.

Petition to the White House

After Swartz's death, more than 50,000 people signed an online petition to the White House calling for the removal of Ortiz, "for overreach in the case of Aaron Swartz." A similar petition was submitted calling for prosecutor Stephen Heymann's firing. In January 2015, two years after Swartz's death, the White House declined both petitions.

Commemorations

On August 3, 2013, Swartz was posthumously inducted into the Internet Hall of Fame. There was a hackathon held in Swartz' memory around the date of his birthday in 2013. Over the weekend of November 8–10, 2013, inspired by Swartz's work and life, a second annual hackathon was held in at least 16 cities around the world. Preliminary topics worked on at the 2013 Aaron Swartz Hackathon were privacy and software tools, transparency, activism, access, legal fixes, and a low-cost book scanner. In January 2014, Lawrence Lessig led a walk across New Hampshire in honor of Swartz, rallying for campaign finance reform.

In 2017 the Turkish-Dutch artist Ahmet Öğüt commemorated Swartz through a work entitled "Information Power to The People" and depicting his bust.

A sculpture of Aaron Swartz entitled "Information Power to The People" created by Ahmet Öğüt

Legacy

Open Access

A long-time supporter of open access, Swartz wrote in his Guerilla Open Access Manifesto:
The world's entire scientific ... heritage ... is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations....
The Open Access Movement has fought valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrights away but instead ensure their work is published on the Internet, under terms that allow anyone to access it.
Supporters of Swartz responded to news of his death with an effort called #PDFTribute to promote Open Access. On January 12, Eva Vivalt, a development economist at the World Bank, began posting her academic articles online using the hashtag #pdftribute as a tribute to Swartz. Scholars posted links to their works. The story of Aaron Swartz has exposed the topic of open access to scientific publications to wider audiences. In the wake of Aaron Swartz, many institutions and personalities have campaigned for open access to scientific knowledge. Swartz's death prompted calls for more open access to scholarly data (e.g., open science data). The Think Computer Foundation and the Center for Information Technology Policy (CITP) at Princeton University announced scholarships awarded in memory of Aaron Swartz. In 2013, Swartz was posthumously awarded the American Library Association's James Madison Award for being an "outspoken advocate for public participation in government and unrestricted access to peer-reviewed scholarly articles." In March, the editor and editorial board of the Journal of Library Administration resigned en masse, citing a dispute with the journal's publisher, Routledge. One board member wrote of a "crisis of conscience about publishing in a journal that was not open access" after the death of Aaron Swartz. In 2002, Swartz had stated that when he died, he wanted all the contents of his hard drives made publicly available. The "cOAlition S", a consortium launched by the European Research Council continues the fight of Aaron Swartz with the will to make available to all by 2020 all the scientific publications financed by the member states of this coalition.

Congress

Several members of the U.S. House of Representatives – Republican Darrell Issa and Democrats Jared Polis and Zoe Lofgren – all on the House Judiciary Committee, have raised questions regarding the government's handling of the case. Calling the charges against him "ridiculous and trumped up," Polis said Swartz was a "martyr", whose death illustrated the need for Congress to limit the discretion of federal prosecutors. Speaking at a memorial for Swartz on Capitol Hill, Issa said
Ultimately, knowledge belongs to all the people of the world.... Aaron understood that.... Our copyright laws were created for the purpose of promoting useful works, not hiding them.
Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren issued a statement saying "[Aaron's] advocacy for Internet freedom, social justice, and Wall Street reform demonstrated ... the power of his ideas ..." In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn asked, "On what basis did the U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts conclude that her office's conduct was 'appropriate'?" and "Was the prosecution of Mr. Swartz in any way retaliation for his exercise of his rights as a citizen under the Freedom of Information Act?"

Congressional investigations

Issa, who chaired the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, announced that he would investigate the Justice Department's actions in prosecuting Swartz. In a statement to The Huffington Post, he praised Swartz's work toward "open government and free access to the people." Issa's investigation has garnered some bipartisan support.

On January 28, 2013, Issa and ranking committee member Elijah Cummings published a letter to U.S. Attorney General Holder, questioning why federal prosecutors had filed the superseding indictment. On February 20, WBUR reported that Ortiz was expected to testify at an upcoming Oversight Committee hearing about her office's handling of the Swartz case. On February 22, Associate Deputy Attorney General Steven Reich conducted a briefing for congressional staffers involved in the investigation. They were told that Swartz's Guerilla Open Access Manifesto played a role in prosecutorial decision-making. Congressional staffers left this briefing believing that prosecutors thought Swartz had to be convicted of a felony carrying at least a short prison sentence in order to justify having filed the case against him in the first place.

Excoriating the Department of Justice as the "Department of Vengeance", Stinebrickner-Kauffman told the Guardian that the DOJ had erred in relying on Swartz's Guerilla Open Access Manifesto as an accurate indication of his beliefs by 2010. "He was no longer a single issue activist," she said. "He was into lots of things, from healthcare, to climate change to money in politics."

On March 6, Holder testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the case was "a good use of prosecutorial discretion." Stinebrickner-Kauffman issued a statement in reply, repeating and amplifying her claims of prosecutorial misconduct. Public documents, she wrote, reveal that prosecutor Stephen Heymann "instructed the Secret Service to seize and hold evidence without a warrant... lied to the judge about that fact in written briefs... [and] withheld exculpatory evidence... for over a year," violating his legal and ethical obligations to turn such evidence over to the defense. On March 22, Senator Al Franken wrote Holder a letter expressing concerns, writing that "charging a young man like Mr. Swartz with federal offenses punishable by over 35 years of federal imprisonment seems remarkably aggressive – particularly when it appears that one of the principal aggrieved parties ... did not support a criminal prosecution."

Amendment to Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

In 2013, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) introduced a bill, Aaron's Law (H.R. 2454, S. 1196) to exclude terms of service violations from the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and from the wire fraud statute.

Lawrence Lessig wrote of the bill, "this is a critically important change.... The CFAA was the hook for the government's bullying.... This law would remove that hook. In a single line: no longer would it be a felony to breach a contract." Professor Orin Kerr, a specialist in the nexus between computer law and criminal law, wrote that he had been arguing for precisely this sort of reform of the Act for years. The ACLU, too, has called for reform of the CFAA to "remove the dangerously broad criminalization of online activity." The EFF has mounted a campaign for these reforms. Lessig's inaugural Chair lecture as Furman Professor of Law and Leadership was entitled Aaron's Laws: Law and Justice in a Digital Age; he dedicated the lecture to Swartz.

The Aaron's Law bill stalled in committee. Brian Knappenberger alleges this was due to Oracle Corporation's financial interest in maintaining the status quo.

Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act

The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR) is a bill that would mandate earlier public release of taxpayer-funded research. FASTR has been described as "The Other Aaron's Law."

Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Senator John Cornyn (R-Tex.) introduced the Senate version, in 2013 and again in 2015, while the bill was introduced to the House by Reps. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and Kevin Yoder (R-Kans.). Senator Wyden wrote of the bill, "the FASTR act provides that access to taxpayer funded research should never be hidden behind a paywall."

While the legislation had not passed as of October 2015, it helped to prompt some motion toward more open access on the part of the US administration. Shortly after the bill's original introduction, the Office of Science and Technology Policy directed "each Federal agency with over $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures to develop a plan to support increased public access to the results of research funded by the Federal Government."

Media

Swartz has been featured in various works of art and has posthumously received dedications from numerous artists. In 2013, Kenneth Goldsmith dedicated his "Printing out the Internet" exhibition to Swartz. The fate of Aaron Swartz was also featured in conservative filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza's 2014 documentary America: Imagine the World Without Her, wherein D'Souza compares Swartz's prosecution to his own conviction for violating campaign finance laws, and alleges that both cases exemplify selective, overzealous prosecution. There are also dedicated biographical films for Aaron:

The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz

On January 11, 2014, marking the first anniversary of his death, a preview was released of The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz, a documentary about Swartz, the NSA and SOPA. The film was officially released at the January 2014 Sundance Film Festival. Democracy Now! covered the release of the documentary, as well as Swartz's life and legal case, in a sprawling interview with director Brian Knappenberger, Swartz's father, brother, and his attorney. The documentary is released under a Creative Commons License; it debuted in theaters and on-demand in June 2014.

Mashable called the documentary "a powerful homage to Aaron Swartz". Its debut at Sundance received a standing ovation. Mashable printed, "With the help of experts, The Internet's Own Boy makes a clear argument: Swartz unjustly became a victim of the rights and freedoms for which he stood." The Hollywood Reporter described it as a "heartbreaking" story of a "tech wunderkind persecuted by the US government", and a must-see "for anyone who knows enough to care about the way laws govern information transfer in the digital age".

Killswitch

In October 2014, Killswitch, a film featuring Aaron Swartz, as well as Lawrence Lessig, Tim Wu, and Edward Snowden, received its world premiere at the Woodstock Film Festival, where it won the award for Best Editing. The film focuses on Swartz's role in advocating for internet freedoms.

In February 2015, Killswitch was invited to screen at the Capitol Visitor's Center in Washington, D.C. by Congressman Alan Grayson. The event was held on the eve of the Federal Communications Commission's historic decision on Net Neutrality. Congressman Grayson, Lawrence Lessig, and Free Press CEO Craig Aaron spoke about Swartz and his fight on behalf of a free and open Internet at the event.

Congressman Grayson states that Killswitch is "one of the most honest accounts of the battle to control the Internet – and access to information itself." Richard von Busack of the Metro Silicon Valley writes of Killswitch, "Some of the most lapidary use of found footage this side of The Atomic Café". Fred Swegles of the Orange County Register remarks, "Anyone who values unfettered access to online information is apt to be captivated by Killswitch, a gripping and fast-paced documentary." Kathy Gill of GeekWire asserts that "Killswitch is much more than a dry recitation of technical history. Director Ali Akbarzadeh, producer Jeff Horn, and writer Chris Dollar created a human-centered story. A large part of that connection comes from Lessig and his relationship with Swartz."

Other films

Patriot of the Web is an independent biographical film about Aaron Swartz, written and directed by Darius Burke. The film was released on September 15, 2019 onto YouTube. Actor Shawn Mcclintock plays Aaron Swartz.  The film had a limited video on demand release in December 2017 on Reelhouse and in January 2018 on Pivotshare.

Another biographical film about Swartz, Think Aaron, is being developed by HBO Films.

Works

Specifications

  • Markdown: Swartz was a major contributor to John Gruber's Markdown, a lightweight markup language for generating HTML, and author of its html2text translator. The syntax for Markdown was influenced by Swartz's earlier atx language (2002), which today is primarily remembered for its syntax for specifying headers, known as atx-style headers: Markdown itself remains in widespread use, with websites such as Reddit and GitHub using it.
  • RDF/XML at W3C: In 2001, Swartz joined the RDFCore working group at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), where he authored RFC 3870, Application/RDF+XML Media Type Registration. The document described a new media type, "RDF/XML", designed to support the Semantic Web.

Software

Publication

Sci-Hub

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Sci-Hub
Official logo of Sci-Hub depicting black raven drawing with reddish key in mouth
Type of site
File sharing
Available in
  • English
  • Russian
Created byAlexandra Elbakyan
Websitesci-hub.tw
sci-hub.se
sci-hub.zone
sci-hub.ren
CommercialNo
RegistrationNot required
Launched16 April 2011; 8 years ago
Current statusActive
Content license
Hosts material without regard to copyright

Sci-Hub is a website that provides free access to millions of research papers and books, without regard to copyright, by bypassing publishers' paywalls in various ways.

Sci-Hub was founded by Alexandra Elbakyan in 2011 in Kazakhstan in response to the high cost of research papers behind paywalls. The site is widely used in both developed and developing countries. In January 2020, the site's owners said that it contained 78 million academic articles and served approximately 400,000 requests per day. The number of articles claimed is frequently updated on the site's home page, being over 81 million in early March 2020.

Sci-Hub and Elbakyan were sued twice for copyright infringement in the United States in 2015 and 2017, and lost both cases, leading to loss of some of its Internet domain names. The site has cycled through different domain names since then.

Sci-Hub has been lauded by some in the scientific, academic, and publishing communities for providing access to knowledge generated by the scientific community. Others have criticized it for violating copyright, threatening the economic viability of publishers, potentially compromising universities' network security and jeopardizing legitimate access to papers by university staff.

History

Number of papers downloaded from Sci-Hub per capita by country (September 2015 to February 2016)
 
Sci-Hub was created by Alexandra Elbakyan, who was born in Kazakhstan in 1988. Elbakyan earned her undergraduate degree at Kazakh National Technical University studying information technology, then worked for a year for a computer security firm in Moscow, then joined a research team at the University of Freiburg in Germany in 2010 that was working on a brain–computer interface. She found the lab dull and became interested in transhumanism. After attending a transhumanism conference in the United States, Elbakyan spent her remaining time in the country doing a research internship at Georgia Institute of Technology. She later returned to Kazakhstan, where her participation in research‐sharing forums led her to conceive of a way to automate the process of sharing. The Sci-Hub website was launched on 5 September 2011.

Legal situation

United States

In 2015, Elsevier filed a lawsuit against Sci-Hub, in Elsevier et al. v. Sci-Hub et al., at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Library Genesis (LibGen) was also a defendant in the case which may be based in either the Netherlands or also in Russia. It was the largest copyright infringement case that had been filed in the US, or in the world, at the time. Elsevier alleged that Sci-Hub violated copyright law and induced others to do so, and it alleged violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act as well as inducements to violate that law. Elsevier asked for monetary damages and an injunction to stop the sharing of the papers.

At the time the website was hosted in St. Petersburg, Russia, where judgments made by American courts were not enforceable, and Sci-Hub did not defend the lawsuit. In June 2017, the court awarded Elsevier US$15 million in damages for copyright infringement by Sci-Hub and others in a default judgment. The judgment found that Sci-Hub used accounts of students and academic institutions to access articles through Elsevier's platform ScienceDirect. The judgment also granted the injunction, which led to the loss of the original sci-hub.org domain.

In early 2016, data released by Elbakyan showed usage in developed countries was high, with a large proportion of the downloads coming from the US and countries within the European Union.

In June 2017, the American Chemical Society (ACS) filed a lawsuit against Sci-Hub in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging copyright and trademark infringement; it sought judgment US$4.8 million from Sci-Hub in damages, and Internet service provider blocking of the Sci-Hub website. On 6 November 2017, the ACS was granted a default judgment, and a permanent injunction was granted against all parties in active concert or participation with Sci-Hub that has notice of the injunction, "including any Internet search engines, web hosting and Internet service providers, domain name registrars, and domain name registries", to cease facilitating access to the service. On 23 November 2017, four Sci-Hub domains had been rendered inactive by the court order and its CloudFlare account was terminated.

Sci-Hub has since cycled through domain names, some of which have been blocked by domain registry operators. Sci-Hub remained reachable via alternative domains such as .io, then .cc, and .bz.[25] Sci-Hub has also been accessible at times by directly entering the IP address, or through a .onion Tor Hidden Service.

In December 2019, The Washington Post reported that the US Justice Department is investigating whether Sci-Hub founder Alexandra Elbakyan has links with Russian intelligence, in part due to the suspicion that tacit approval or assistance of the Russians is required considering the scale of Sci-Hub's operation.

Sweden

In October 2018, Swedish ISPs were forced to block access to Sci-Hub after a court case instigated by Elsevier; Bahnhof, a large Swedish ISP, in return soft-blocked the Elsevier website.

Russia

In November 2018, Russia's Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media blocked Sci-Hub and its mirror websites after a Moscow City Court ruling to comply with Elsevier's and Springer Nature's complaints regarding intellectual property infringement. The site moved to another domain and is still available online as of 22 October 2019.

France

On 7 March 2019, following a complaint by Elsevier and Springer Nature, a French court ordered French ISPs to block access to Sci-Hub and Library Genesis. However, the court order did not affect the academic network Renater, through which most French academic access to Sci-Hub presumably goes.

Belgium

Following the lawsuit by Elsevier in March 2019 in France, Elsevier, Springer, John Wiley, and Cambridge University Press filed a complaint against Proximus, VOO, Brutélé and Telenet to block access to Sci-Hub and LibGen. The publishers claimed to represent more than half of the scientific publishing sector and indicated over 90% of the contents on the sites infringe copyright laws, thus winning the lawsuit. Since then, the two sites are blocked by those ISPs and the visitors are redirected to a stop page  by Belgian Federal Police, citing illegality of the shared by them content under Belgian legislation.

In 2018 and 2019, the White House Office of the US Trade Representative named Sci-Hub as one of the most "notorious market" sites in the world. The European Commission similarly included Sci-Hub in the Commission's own official "Piracy Watch List".

Website

The site's operation is financed by user donations.

Article sourcing

Sci-Hub obtains paywalled articles using leaked credentials. The source of the credentials used by Sci-Hub is unclear. Some appear to have been donated, some were apparently sold before going to Sci-Hub, and some appear to have been obtained via phishing and were then used by Sci-Hub. Elbakyan denies personally sending any phishing emails and said, "The exact source of the passwords was never personally important to me." According to The Scholarly Kitchen, a blog established by the Society for Scholarly Publishing whose members are involved in legal action against Sci-Hub, credentials used by Sci-Hub to access paywalled articles are correlated to access of other information on university networks (such as cyber spying on universities) and credential sales in black markets. Several articles have reported that Sci-Hub has penetrated the computer networks of more than 370 universities in 39 countries. These include more than 150 institutions in the US, more than 30 in Canada, 39 in the UK and more than 10 in Sweden. The universities in the UK include Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial and King's College, London.

Delivery to users

The Sci-Hub website provides access to articles from almost all academic publishers, including Elsevier, Springer/Nature, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, American Chemical Society, Wiley Blackwell, and the Royal Society of Chemistry, as well as open-access works, and distributes them in violation of publishers' copyrights. It does not require subscriptions or payment.

Users can access works from all sources with a unified interface, including by: entering the DOI in the search bar on the main page or in the Sci-Hub URL (like some academic link resolvers); or appending the Sci-Hub domain to the domain of a publisher's URL (like some academic proxies). Sci-Hub redirects requests for some gold open access works, identified as such beyond the metadata available in CrossRef and Unpaywall. Some requests require the user to enter a CAPTCHA. Papers can also be accessed using a bot in the instant messaging service Telegram.

If the paper is in the repository already, the request is served immediately. If the paper is not already in the repository, a wait screen appears while the site presents someone else's credentials on behalf of the user to a series of proxies until it finds one that has access to the paper, which is then presented to the user and stored in the repository.

Until the end of 2014, Sci-Hub relied on LibGen as storage: papers requested by users were requested from LibGen and served from there if available, otherwise they were fetched by other means and then stored on LibGen. The permanent storage made it possible to serve more users than the previous system of deleting the cached content after 6 hours.

Since 2015, Sci-Hub relies on its own storage for the same purpose. As of 2017 Sci-Hub was continuing to rely on LibGen for electronic books, requests for which are redirected to LibGen.

Usage and content statistics

Download rate for articles on Sci-Hub
 
In February 2016, the website claimed to serve over 200,000 requests per day—an increase from an average of 80,000 per day before the "sci-hub.org" domain was blocked in 2015.

In March 2017, the website had 62 million papers in its collection, which were found to include 85% of the articles published in paywalled scholarly journals. Although only 69% of all published articles were in the database in March 2017, it has been estimated, based on scholarly citations from articles published between 2015 and July 2017, that at least 96% of requests for paywalled articles are successful.

A 2019 study of 27.8 million download requests via Sci-Hub indicates that 23.2 million of these were for journal articles, 4.7 million (22%) of which were articles from medical journals. The requests for medical literature came mostly from middle- and low-income countries (69%); the countries with the most requests in absolute numbers were India, China, the US, Brazil, and Iran.

Reception

Alexandra Elbakyan at a conference at Harvard (2010)
 
Sci-Hub's interface is perceived by users as providing a superior user experience and convenience compared to the typical interfaces available to users who have access to a paid subscription.

Sci-Hub has been lauded as having "changed how we access knowledge". It raised awareness about the scientific publishing business models and its ethics of making researchers' institutions pay for their articles to be published, while providing and reviewing them without payment.

Support for open-access science publishing extends beyond Sci-Hub; Plan S is an initiative launched by Science Europe on 4 September 2018. It is an initiative of "cOAlition S", a consortium launched by major national research agencies and funders from twelve European countries. The plan requires scientists and researchers who benefit from state-funded research organisations and institutions to publish their work in open repositories or in journals that are available to all by 2021. The initiative is not a law.

Scientists in some European countries began negotiations with Elsevier and other academic publishers on introducing national open access.

Publishers have been very critical of Sci-Hub, going so far as to claim that it is undermining more widely accepted open-access initiatives, and that it ignores how publishers "work hard" to make access for third-world nations easier. It has also been criticized by librarians for compromising universities' network security and jeopardizing legitimate access to papers by university staff.

However, even prominent western institutions such as Harvard and Cornell have had to cut down their access to publications due to ever-increasing subscription costs, potentially causing some of the highest use of Sci-Hub to be in American cities with well-known universities (this may however be down to the convenience of the site rather than a lack of access). Sci-Hub can be seen as one venue in a general trend in which research is becoming more accessible. Many academics, university librarians and longtime advocates for open scholarly research believe Elbakyan is "giving academic publishers their Napster moment", referring to the illegal music-sharing service that "disrupted and permanently altered the industry".

For her actions in creating Sci-Hub, Elbakyan has been called a hero and "spiritual successor to Aaron Swartz" who in 2010 downloaded millions of academic articles from JSTOR. She has also been compared to Edward Snowden who has sought safety in Russia after having made numerous documents public in violation of American law. She has also been called a modern-day "Robin Hood" and a "Robin Hood of science".

In August 2016, the Association of American Publishers sent a letter to Gabriel J. Gardner, a researcher at California State University who has written papers on Sci-Hub and similar sites. The letter asked Gardner to stop promoting the site, which he had discussed at a session of a meeting of the American Library Association. In response the publishing institution was highly criticized for trying to silence legitimate research into the topic, and the letter has since been published in full, and responded to by the dean of library services at Cal State Long Beach, who supported Gardner's work.

In December 2016, Nature Publishing Group named Alexandra Elbakyan as one of the ten people who most mattered in 2016.

In 2017, Russian and Mexican entomologists named a species of parasitoid wasp Idiogramma elbakyanae in reference to Sci-Hub's creator, Alexandra Elbakyan. The Russian and Mexican team said this was "in honour of Alexandra Elbakyan (Kazakhstan/Russia), creator of the web-site Sci-Hub, in recognition of her contribution to making scientific knowledge available for all researchers." Elbakyan was offended by the naming, and subsequently blocked access to Sci-Hub's services in the Russian Federation. The Russian entomologist responsible for naming the wasp stated that he supports Sci-Hub, and that in any event, the naming was not an insult, in particular because parasitoids are closer to predators than to parasites.

In response to the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak, a group of online archivists have used Sci-Hub for creating an archive of over 5000 articles about coronaviruses. They admitted that making the archive openly accessible was illegal, but considered it a moral imperative.

Elsevier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
IndustryPublishing
Founded1880; 140 years ago
Headquarters
Revenue£2.54 billion (2018)
600,000,000 United States dollar[2] (2009) Edit this on Wikidata
Number of employees
6,900 (2008) Edit this on Wikidata
ParentRELX
Websitewww.elsevier.com

Elsevier (Dutch: [ˈɛlzəviːr]) is a Dutch publishing and analytics company specializing in scientific, technical, and medical content. It is a part of the RELX Group, known until 2015 as Reed Elsevier. Its products include journals such as The Lancet and Cell, the ScienceDirect collection of electronic journals, the Trends and Current Opinion series of journals, the online citation database Scopus, and the ClinicalKey search engine for clinicians. Elsevier's products also include digital tools for data-management, instruction, and assessment.

Elsevier publishes more than 470,000 articles annually in 2,500 journals. Its archives contain over 16 million documents and 30,000 e-books. Total yearly downloads amount to more than 1 billion.

Elsevier's high operating profit margins (37% in 2018) and 950 million pounds in profits, often on publicly funded research works and its copyright practices have subjected it to criticism by researchers.

History

The original seal of the Elsevier family, used by Elsevier company as logo until 2019.
 
Elsevier was founded in 1880 and adopted the name and logo from the Dutch publishing house Elzevir that was an inspiration but has no connection to the contemporary Elsevier.[6] The Elzevir family operated as booksellers and publishers in the Netherlands; the founder, Lodewijk Elzevir (1542–1617), lived in Leiden and established the business in 1580. As company logo, Elsevier used the Elzevir family's printer's mark, a tree entwined with a vine and the words Non Solus, which is Latin for "not alone." Elsevier suggests that this logo represents "the symbiotic relationship between publisher and scholar".

The expansion of Elsevier in the scientific field after 1945 was funded with the profits of the newsweekly Elsevier, which published its first issue on 27 October 1945. The weekly was an instant success and earned lots of money. The weekly was a continuation, as is stated in its first issue, of the monthly Elsevier, which was founded in 1891 to promote the name of the publishing house and had to stop publication in December 1940 because of the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands.

In 1947, Elsevier began publishing its first English-language journal, Biochimica et Biophysica Acta.

In 2013, Elsevier acquired Mendeley, a UK company making software for managing and sharing research papers. Mendeley, previously an open platform for sharing of research, was greatly criticized for the acquisition, which users saw as acceding to the "paywall" approach to research literature. Mendeley's previously open sharing system now allows exchange of paywalled resources only within private groups. The New Yorker described Elsevier's reasons for buying Mendeley as two-fold: to acquire its user data, and to "destroy or coöpt an open-science icon that threatens its business model".

In the first half of 2019, RELX reported the first slowdown in revenue growth for Elsevier in several years: 1% vs. an expectation of 2% and a typical growth of at least 4% in the previous 5 years.

Company statistics

During 2018, researchers submitted over 1.8 million research papers to Elsevier-based publications. Over 20,000 editors managed the peer review and selection of these papers, resulting in the publication of more than 470,000 articles in over 2,500 journals. Editors are generally unpaid volunteers who perform their duties alongside a full-time job in academic institutions, although exceptions have been reported. 

In 2013, the five editorial groups Elsevier, Springer, Wiley-Blackwell, Taylor & Francis, and SAGE Publications published more than half of all academic papers in the peer-reviewed literature. At that time, Elsevier accounted for 16% of the world market in science, technology, and medical publishing.

Elsevier breaks down its revenue sources by format and by geographic region. Approximately 44% of revenue by geography in 2018 derived from North America, 24% from Europe and the remaining 32% from the rest of the world. Approximately 83% of revenue by format came from electronic usage and 17% came from print.

Elsevier employs more than 7,800 people in over 70 offices across 24 countries. Following the integration of its Science & Technology and Health Sciences divisions in 2012, Elsevier has operated under a traditional business structure with a single chief executive officer (CEO). The CEO is Kumsal Bayazit, who was appointed on 15 February 2019. 

In 2018, Elsevier accounted for 34% of the revenues of RELX group (₤2.538 billion of ₤7.492 billion). In operating profits, it represented 40% (₤942 million of ₤2,346 million). Adjusted operating profits (with constant currency) rose by 2% from 2017 to 2018.

In 2018, Elsevier reported a mean 2017 gender pay gap of 29.1% for its UK workforce, while the median was 40.4%, more than twice the UK average and by far the worst figure recorded by any academic publisher in UK. Elsevier attributed the result to the under-representation of women in its senior ranks and the prevalence of men in its technical workforce.

Market model

Products and services

Products and services include electronic and print versions of journals, textbooks and reference works, and cover the health, life, physical and social sciences.

The target markets are academic and government research institutions, corporate research labs, booksellers, librarians, scientific researchers, authors, editors, physicians, nurses, allied health professionals, medical and nursing students and schools, medical researchers, pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, and research establishments. It publishes in 13 languages including English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Polish, Japanese, Hindi, and Chinese.

Flagship products and services include VirtualE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Scirus, EMBASE, Engineering Village, Compendex, Cell, SciVal, Pure, and Analytical Services, The Consult series (FirstCONSULT, PathCONSULT, NursingCONSULT, MDConsult, StudentCONSULT), Virtual Clinical Excursions, and major reference works such as Gray's Anatomy, Nelson Pediatrics, Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary, Netter's Atlas of Human Anatomy, and online versions of many journals including The Lancet.

ScienceDirect is Elsevier's platform for online electronic access to its journals and over 6,000 e-books, reference works, book series, and handbooks. The articles are grouped in four main sections: Physical Sciences and Engineering, Life Sciences, Health Sciences, and Social Sciences and Humanities. For most articles on the website, abstracts are freely available; access to the full text of the article (in PDF, and also HTML for newer publications) often requires a subscription or pay-per-view purchase.

Research and information ecosystem

RELX Group has been active in mergers and acquisitions. Elsevier has been joined by businesses which were either complementing or competing in the field of research and publishing and which reinforce its market power, such as Mendeley (after the closure of 2collab), SSRN, bepress/Digital Commons, PlumX, Hivebench, Newsflo. These integrations are seen as a way to exert additional power on the research process. The group contains additional information and analytics companies, particularly LexisNexis and ThreatMetrix.

Conferences

Elsevier conducts conferences, exhibitions and workshops around the world, with over 50 conferences a year covering life sciences, physical sciences and engineering, social sciences, and health sciences.

Pricing

In the 21st century, the subscription rates charged by the company for its journals have been criticized; some very large journals (with more than 5,000 articles) charge subscription prices as high as £9,634, far above average, and many British universities pay more than a million pounds to Elsevier annually. The company has been criticized not only by advocates of a switch to the open-access publication model, but also by universities whose library budgets make it difficult for them to afford current journal prices.

For example, a resolution by Stanford University's senate singled out Elsevier's journals as being "disproportionately expensive compared to their educational and research value", which librarians should consider dropping, and encouraged its faculty "not to contribute articles or editorial or review efforts to publishers and journals that engage in exploitive or exorbitant pricing". Similar guidelines and criticism of Elsevier's pricing policies have been passed by the University of California, Harvard University, and Duke University.

In July 2015, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) announced a plan to start boycotting Elsevier, which refused to negotiate on any Open Access policy for Dutch universities. In December 2016, Nature Publishing Group reported that academics in Germany, Peru and Taiwan are to lose access to Elsevier journals as negotiations had broken down with the publisher.

A complaint about Elsevier/RELX was made to the UK Competition and Markets Authority in December 2016. In October 2018, a competition complaint against Elsevier was filed with the European Commission, alleging anti-competitive practices stemming from Elsevier's confidential subscription agreements and market dominance.

Shill review offer

According to the BBC, "the firm [Elsevier] offered a £17.25 Amazon voucher to academics who contributed to the textbook Clinical Psychology if they would go on Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble (a large US books retailer) and give it five stars." Elsevier said that "encouraging interested parties to post book reviews isn't outside the norm in scholarly publishing, nor is it wrong to offer to nominally compensate people for their time. But in all instances the request should be unbiased, with no incentives for a positive review, and that's where this particular e-mail went too far", and that it was a mistake by a marketing employee.

Blocking text mining research

Elsevier seeks to regulate text and data mining with private licenses, claiming that reading requires extra permission if automated and that the publisher holds copyright on output of automated processes. The conflict on research and copyright policy has often resulted in researchers being blocked from their work.

In November 2015, Elsevier blocked a scientist from performing text mining research at scale on Elsevier papers, even though his institution already pays for access to Elsevier journal content. The data were collected via parsing of downloaded PDF and HTML files, although Elsevier claimed that the method used was screenscraping.

Academic practices

"Who's Afraid of Peer Review"

One of Elsevier's journals was caught in the sting set up by John Bohannon, published in Science, called "Who's Afraid of Peer Review?" The journal Drug Invention Today accepted an obviously bogus paper made up by Bohannon that should have been rejected by any good peer review system. Instead, Drug Invention Today was among many open access journals that accepted the fake paper for publication. As of 2014, this journal had been transferred to a different publisher.

Fake journals

At a 2009 court case in Australia where Merck & Co. was being sued by a user of Vioxx, the plaintiff alleged that Merck had paid Elsevier to publish the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, which had the appearance of being a peer-reviewed academic journal but in fact contained only articles favourable to Merck drugs. Merck described the journal as a "complimentary publication," denied claims that articles within it were ghost written by Merck, and stated that the articles were all reprinted from peer-reviewed medical journals. In May 2009, Elsevier Health Sciences CEO Hansen released a statement regarding Australia-based sponsored journals, conceding that they were "sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures." The statement acknowledged that it "was an unacceptable practice." The Scientist reported that, according to an Elsevier spokesperson, six sponsored publications "were put out by their Australia office and bore the Excerpta Medica imprint from 2000 to 2005," namely the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine (Australas. J. Bone Joint Med.), the Australasian Journal of General Practice (Australas. J. Gen. Pract.), the Australasian Journal of Neurology (Australas. J. Neurol.), the Australasian Journal of Cardiology (Australas. J. Cardiol.), the Australasian Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (Australas. J. Clin. Pharm.), and the Australasian Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine (Australas. J. Cardiovasc. Med.). Excerpta Medica was a "strategic medical communications agency" run by Elsevier, according to the imprint's web page. In October 2010, Excerpta Medica was acquired by Adelphi Worldwide.

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals

There was speculation that the editor-in-chief of Elsevier journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Mohamed El Naschie, misused his power to publish his own work without appropriate peer review. The journal had published 322 papers with El Naschie as author since 1993. The last issue of December 2008 featured five of his papers. The controversy was covered extensively in blogs. The publisher announced in January 2009 that El Naschie had retired as editor-in-chief. As of November 2011 the co-Editors-in-Chief of the journal were Maurice Courbage and Paolo Grigolini. In June 2011, El Naschie sued the journal Nature for libel, claiming that his reputation had been damaged by their November 2008 article about his retirement, which included statements that Nature had been unable to verify his claimed affiliations with certain international institutions. The suit came to trial in November 2011 and was dismissed in July 2012, with the judge ruling that the article was "substantially true", contained "honest comment" and was "the product of responsible journalism". The judgement noted that El Naschie, who represented himself in court, had failed to provide any documentary evidence that his papers had been peer-reviewed. Judge Victoria Sharp also found "reasonable and serious grounds" for suspecting that El Naschie used a range of false names to defend his editorial practice in communications with Nature, and described this behavior as "curious" and "bizarre." 

Plagiarism

Some Elsevier journals automatically screen submissions for plagiarism, but not all.

In 2018, Elsevier journal Procedia was reported to have published plagiarism by an Albanian politician in 2012.

Control of journals

Resignation of editorial boards

In November 1999 the entire editorial board (50 persons) of the Journal of Logic Programming (founded in 1984 by Alan Robinson) collectively resigned after 16 months of unsuccessful negotiations with Elsevier Press about the price of library subscriptions. The personnel created a new journal, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, with Cambridge University Press at a much lower price, while Elsevier continued publication with a new editorial board and a slightly different name (the Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming).

In 2002, dissatisfaction at Elsevier's pricing policies caused the European Economic Association to terminate an agreement with Elsevier designating Elsevier's European Economic Review as the official journal of the association. The EEA launched a new journal, the Journal of the European Economic Association.

In 2003, the entire editorial board of the Journal of Algorithms resigned to start ACM Transactions on Algorithms with a different, lower-priced, not-for-profit publisher, at the suggestion of Journal of Algorithms founder Donald Knuth. The Journal of Algorithms continued under Elsevier with a new editorial board until October 2009, when it was discontinued.

The same happened in 2005 to the International Journal of Solids and Structures, whose editors resigned to start the Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures. However, a new editorial board was quickly established and the journal continues in apparently unaltered form with editors D.A. Hills (Oxford University) and Stelios Kyriakides (University of Texas at Austin).

In August 2006, the entire editorial board of the distinguished mathematical journal Topology handed in their resignation, again because of stalled negotiations with Elsevier to lower the subscription price. This board then launched the new Journal of Topology at a far lower price, under the auspices of the London Mathematical Society. After this mass resignation, Topology remained in circulation under a new editorial board until 2009, when the last issue was published.

The French École Normale Supérieure has stopped having Elsevier publish the journal Annales Scientifiques de l'École Normale Supérieure (as of 2008).

The elevated pricing of field journals in economics, most of which are published by Elsevier, was one of the motivations that moved the American Economic Association to launch the American Economic Journal in 2009.

In May 2015, Stephen Leeder was removed from his role as editor of the Medical Journal of Australia after its publisher decided to outsource the journal's production to Elsevier. As a consequence, all but one of the journal's editorial advisory committee members co-signed a letter of resignation.

In October 2015, the entire editorial staff of the general linguistics journal Lingua resigned in protest of Elsevier's unwillingness to agree to their terms of Fair Open Access. Editor in Chief Johan Rooryck also announced that the Lingua staff would establish a new journal, Glossa.

In January 2019, the entire editorial board of Elsevier's Journal of Informetrics resigned over the open-access policies of its publisher and founded open-access journal called Quantitative Science Studies.

"The Cost of Knowledge" boycott

In 2003 various university librarians began coordinating with each other to complain about Elsevier's "big deal" journal bundling packages, in which the company offered a group of journal subscriptions to libraries at a certain rate, but in which librarians claimed there was no economical option to subscribe to only the popular journals at a rate comparable to the bundled rate. Librarians continued to discuss the implications of the pricing schemes, many feeling pressured into buying the Elsevier packages without other options.

On 21 January 2012, mathematician Timothy Gowers publicly announced he would boycott Elsevier, noting that others in the field have been doing so privately. The three reasons for the boycott are high subscription prices for individual journals, bundling subscriptions to journals of different value and importance, and Elsevier's support for SOPA, PIPA, and the Research Works Act.

Following this, a petition advocating non-cooperation with Elsevier (that is, not submitting papers to Elsevier journals, not refereeing articles in Elsevier journals, and not participating in journal editorial boards), appeared on the site "The Cost of Knowledge". By February 2012 this petition had been signed by over 5,000 academics, growing to over 17,000 by November 2018.

Elsevier disputed the claims, claiming that their prices are below the industry average, and stating that bundling is only one of several different options available to buy access to Elsevier journals. The company also claimed that its profit margins are "simply a consequence of the firm's efficient operation". The academics replied that their work was funded by public money and thus should be freely available.

On 27 February 2012, Elsevier issued a statement on its website that declared that it has withdrawn support from the Research Works Act. Although the Cost of Knowledge movement was not mentioned, the statement indicated the hope that the move would "help create a less heated and more productive climate" for ongoing discussions with research funders. Hours after Elsevier's statement, the sponsors of the bill, US House Representatives Darrell Issa and Carolyn Maloney, issued a joint statement saying that they would not push the bill in Congress.

Plan S

The Plan S open-access initiative, which began in Europe and has since spread to some US research funding agencies would force researchers receiving some grants to publish in open access journals by 2020. A spokesman for Elsevier said "If you think that information should be free of charge, go to Wikipedia". In September 2018 UBS advised to sell Elsevier (RELX) stocks, noting that Plan S could affect 5-10% of scientific funding and may force Elsevier to reduce pricing.

Relationship with academic institutions

Finland

In 2015 Finnish research organizations paid a total of 27 million euros in subscription fees. Over one third of the total costs went to Elsevier. The information was revealed after successful court appeal following a denied request on the subscription fees, due to confidentiality clauses in contracts with the publishers. Establishing of this fact lead to creation of tiedonhinta.fi petition demanding more reasonable pricing and open access to content signed by more than 2800 members of the research community. While deals with other publishers have been made, this was not the case for Elsevier, leading to the nodealnoreview.org boycott of the publisher signed more than 600 times.

In January 2018, it was confirmed that a deal had been reached between those concerned.

France

The French Couperin consortium agreed in 2019 to a 4-year contract with Elsevier, despite criticism from the scientific community.

Germany

Almost no academic institution in Germany is subscribed to Elsevier.

Germany's DEAL project (Projekt DEAL) which includes over 60 major research institutions, has announced that all of its members are cancelling their contracts with Elsevier, effective 1 January 2017. The boycott is in response to Elsevier's refusal to adopt "transparent business models" to "make publications more openly accessible". Horst Hippler, spokesperson for the DEAL consortium states that "taxpayers have a right to read what they are paying for" and that "publishers must understand that the route to open-access publishing at an affordable price is irreversible". In July 2017, another 13 institutions announced that they would also be cancelling their subscriptions to Elsevier journals. In August 2017, at least 185 German institutions had cancelled their contracts with Elsevier. In 2018, whilst negotiations were ongoing, around 200 German universities who cancelled their subscriptions to Elsevier journals were granted complimentary open access to them until this ended in July of the year.

On 19 December 2018 the Max Planck Society (MPS) announced that the existing subscription agreement with Elsevier would not be renewed after the expiration date of 31 December 2018. The Max Planck Society counts 14.000 scientists in 84 research institutes, publishing 12.000 articles each year.

Hungary

In March 2018, the Hungarian Electronic Information Service National Programme entered negotiations on its 2019 Elsevier subscriptions, asking for a read-and-publish deal. Negotiations were ended by the Hungarian consortium in December 2018, and the subscription was not renewed.

Iran

In 2013, Elsevier changed its policies in response to sanctions announced by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control that year. This included a request that all Elsevier journals avoid publishing papers by Iranian nationals which are employed by the Iranian government. Elsevier executive Mark Seeley expressed regret on behalf of the company but did not announce an intention to challenge this interpretation of the law.

Italy

CRUI (association of Italian universities) sealed a 5-year-long deal for 2018-2022, despite protests from the scientific community, protests focused on aspects such as the lack of prevention of cost increases by means of the double dipping.

Netherlands

In 2015 a consortium of all of Netherlands' 14 universities threatened to boycott Elsevier if it could not agree that articles by Dutch authors would be made open access and settled with the compromise of 30% of its Dutch papers becoming open access by 2018. Gerard Meijer, president of Radboud University in Nijmegen and lead negotiator on the Dutch side notes that "it's not the 100% that I hoped for".

Norway

In March 2019, the Norwegian government on behalf of 44 institutions — universities, university colleges, research institutes and hospitals — decided to break negotiations on renewal of their subscription deal with Elsevier, because of disagreement regarding open access policy and Elsevier's unwillingness to reduce the cost of reading access.

South Korea

In 2017, over 70 university libraries confirmed a "contract boycott" movement involving three publishers including Elsevier. As of January 2018, whilst negotiations remain underway, a decision will be made as to whether or not continue the participating libraries will continue the boycott. It was subsequently confirmed that an agreement had been reached.

Sweden

In May 2018, the Bibsam Consortium, which negotiates license agreements on behalf of all Swedish universities and research institutes, decided not to renew their contract with Elsevier, alleging that the publisher does not meet the demands of transition towards a more open access model, and referring to the rapidly increasing costs for publishing. Swedish universities will still have access to articles published before 30 June 2018. Astrid Söderbergh Widding, Chairman of the Bibsam Consortium, said that "the current system for scholarly communication must change and our only option is to cancel deals when they don't meet our demands for a sustainable transition to open access".

Sweden has a goal of open access by 2026.

Taiwan

In Taiwan more than 75% of universities, including the region's top 11 institutions, have joined a collective boycott against Elsevier. On 7 December 2016, the Taiwanese consortium, CONCERT, which represents more than 140 institutions, announced it would not renew its contract with Elsevier.

United States

In March 2018, Florida State University's faculty elected to cancel its $2 million subscription to a bundle of several journals. Starting in 2019 it will instead buy access to titles à la carte.

In February 2019, the University of California said it would terminate subscriptions "in push for open access to publicly funded research." After months of negotiations over open access to research by UC researchers and prices for subscriptions to Elsevier journals, a press release by the UC Office of the President issued Thursday, 28 February 2019 stated "Under Elsevier’s proposed terms, the publisher would have charged UC authors large publishing fees on top of the university’s multi-million dollar subscription, resulting in much greater cost to the university and much higher profits for Elsevier." On July 10, 2019 Elsevier began restricting access to all new paywalled articles and approximately 5% of paywalled articles published before 2019.

Dissemination of research

Lobbying efforts against open access

Elsevier have been known to be involved in lobbying against open access. These have included the likes of:

Selling open access articles

In 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, Elsevier was found to be selling some articles which should have been open access, but had been put behind a paywall. A related case occurred in 2015, when Elsevier charged for downloading an open access article from a journal published by John Wiley & Sons. However, it was not clear whether Elsevier was in violation of the license under which the article was made available on their website.

Action against academics posting their own articles online

In 2013, Digimarc, a company representing Elsevier, told the University of Calgary to remove articles published by faculty authors on university web pages; although such self-archiving of academic articles may be legal under the fair dealing provisions in Canadian copyright law, the university complied. Harvard University and the University of California, Irvine also received takedown notices for self-archived academic articles, a first for Harvard, according to Peter Suber.

Months after its acquisition of Academia.edu rival Mendeley, Elsevier sent thousands of takedown notices to Academia.edu, a practice that has since ceased following widespread complaint by academics, according to Academia.edu founder and chief executive Richard Price.

After Elsevier acquired the repository SSRN in May 2016 academics started complaining that some of their work has been removed without notice. The action was explained as a technical error.

Sci-Hub and LibGen lawsuit

In 2015 Elsevier filed a lawsuit against the sites Sci-Hub and LibGen, which make copyright protected articles available for free. Elsevier also claimed illegal access to institutional accounts.

Rejection of the Initiative for Open Citations

Among the major academic publishers, Elsevier alone declined to join the Initiative for Open Citations. In the context of the resignation of the Journal of Informetrics' editorial board, Elsevier stated:
Elsevier invests significantly in citation extraction technology. While these are made available to those who wish to license this data, Elsevier cannot make such a large corpus of data, to which it has added significant value, available for free.

Political psychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...