Citing paywalled articles accessed via illegal web sharingAre academic ethics global or local?How to publish...
Plausible reason for gold-digging ant
Do "fields" always combine by addition?
Is the child responsible for the Parent PLUS Loan when the parent has passed away?
How to visualize the Riemann-Roch theorem from complex analysis or geometric topology considerations?
Cat is tipping over bed-side lamps during the night
What happened to my GE option?
Why are the books in the Game of Thrones citadel library shelved spine inwards?
How does one write from a minority culture? A question on cultural references
Is using an 'empty' metaphor considered bad style?
Why did Luke use his left hand to shoot?
How would an AI self awareness kill switch work?
Which communication protocol is used in AdLib sound card?
Early credit roll before the end of the film
In Linux what happens if 1000 files in a directory are moved to another location while another 300 files were added to the source directory?
How to not let the Identify spell spoil everything?
Is there a defined priority for pattern matching?
Why was Lupin comfortable with saying Voldemort's name?
How to access internet and run apt-get through a middle server?
Strange "DuckDuckGo dork" takes me to random website
Boss asked me to sign a resignation paper without a date on it along with my new contract
Why does photorec keep finding files after I have filled the disk free space as root?
Is "the fire consumed everything on its way" correct?
How to make ice magic work from a scientific point of view?
Play Zip, Zap, Zop
Citing paywalled articles accessed via illegal web sharing
Are academic ethics global or local?How to publish an academic book but make the PDF freely available online?Determining common knowledge in an unfamiliar fieldWhat makes you keep on reading articles in your non-English native language, while the same information might be published in English?How Scopus CSAB plan to evaluate a submitted journal's citedness in Scopus?Does a bibliography-only citation count like a regular citation for the author?How does LibGen/SciHub affect researchers' research and publishing process?How to survive in a small field where unethical senior professors on major editorial boards abuse their power?Uncited general claims followed by cited specific claims – is this an accepted writing style?What do I do if somebody asks me to join his accusation of my colleague of academic misconduct?How to handle an obsession about being 100% academically honest
There are a few site which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
New contributor
add a comment |
There are a few site which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
New contributor
3
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
9 hours ago
3
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
6 hours ago
3
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
add a comment |
There are a few site which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
New contributor
There are a few site which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
publications citations ethics
New contributor
New contributor
edited 21 mins ago
Allure
31.4k1997147
31.4k1997147
New contributor
asked 17 hours ago
Syafiq ZaidiSyafiq Zaidi
11615
11615
New contributor
New contributor
3
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
9 hours ago
3
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
6 hours ago
3
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
add a comment |
3
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
9 hours ago
3
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
6 hours ago
3
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
3
3
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
9 hours ago
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
9 hours ago
3
3
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
6 hours ago
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
6 hours ago
3
3
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
12
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
4
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
9
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
add a comment |
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if you cannot demonstrate legal access.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
10
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
6
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
4
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125570%2fciting-paywalled-articles-accessed-via-illegal-web-sharing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
12
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
12
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
answered 13 hours ago
Tommi BranderTommi Brander
3,81511332
3,81511332
12
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
add a comment |
12
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
12
12
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
10 hours ago
1
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
4 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
3 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
4
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
4
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
answered 13 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
48.9k13159243
48.9k13159243
4
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
add a comment |
4
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
4
4
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
13 hours ago
2
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
13 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
@guifa I see, thanks.
– Anyon
11 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
9
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
9
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
answered 17 hours ago
E. ReiE. Rei
852213
852213
9
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
add a comment |
9
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
9
9
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
add a comment |
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
add a comment |
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 48 mins ago
Sam AxeSam Axe
1011
1011
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if you cannot demonstrate legal access.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
10
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
6
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
4
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if you cannot demonstrate legal access.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
10
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
6
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
4
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if you cannot demonstrate legal access.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if you cannot demonstrate legal access.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
answered 17 hours ago
user2768user2768
13.8k23657
13.8k23657
10
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
6
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
4
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
10
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
6
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
4
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
10
10
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
17 hours ago
6
6
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
16 hours ago
7
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
11 hours ago
4
4
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125570%2fciting-paywalled-articles-accessed-via-illegal-web-sharing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
9 hours ago
3
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
6 hours ago
3
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
4 hours ago