Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Elsevier Turns to Open Access After Corruption with Merck, NHS Still Messed up by Microsoft

  • Subject: [News] Elsevier Turns to Open Access After Corruption with Merck, NHS Still Messed up by Microsoft
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:39:07 +0000
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • User-agent: KNode/0.10.9
Hash: SHA1

Elsevier Does a Microsoft with Open Access

,----[ Quote ]
| I've seen these kind of stories so many times in the world of open source, 
| with Microsoft as the main protagonist, that they warm the cockles of my 
| heart when I see them popping up in other areas like open access. Why? 
| Because if a multi-billion pound company like Elsevier is starting to stoop 
| to this kind of tactic, it demonstrates just how profoundly worried it is -  
| and how close open access is to widespread acceptance.    


NHS Gateway Reviews damn £13bn IT decisions

,----[ Quote ]
| Since the start of the programme the British Medical Association, 
| representing doctors, has repeatedly questioned the systems being used and 
| the management of suppliers.   



Elsevier Reveals More Details About Its Fake Journal Division

,----[ Quote ]
| Remember how Elsevier and Merck were caught putting out a fake journal that
| had articles favoring Merck drugs, implying peer reviewed articles that
| weren't? Soon afterwards, it came out that Elsevier had a whole division for
| such things. However, following an internal investigation, it looks like
| Elsevier is backtracking a bit and saying that, while the group's practices
| were problematic, most weren't as egregious as the "Australasian Journal of
| Bone and Joint Medicine (AJBJM)" that was created by Merck and Elsevier.


Elsevier Had A Whole Division Publishing Fake Medical Journals

,----[ Quote ]
| Remember a week ago when we wrote about pharma giant Merck and publishing
| giant Elsevier working together to publish a fake journal that talked up
| various Merck drugs and was used by doctors to show that the drugs were safe
| and useful?


No bottom to worse at Elsevier?

,----[ Quote ]
| The latest development, though, strikes me as something that should be
| shouted from every available rooftop: Elsevier simply must answer the
| questions raised.
| Via Dorothea: Jonathan Rochkind has done a little "forensic librarianship"
| and raised astonishing questions about the entire imprint, Excerpta Medica,
| which published the fake journal that started all of this.
| Go read Jonathan, but the bottom line is this: Excerpta Medica does not
| provide a straightforward list of its own publications or make clear which
| are, ahem, "industry-sponsored".


Another Reason We Need Open Access

,----[ Quote ]
| One of the more laughable reasons that traditional science publishers cite in
| their attempts to rubbish open access is that it's somehow not so rigorous
| as "their" kind of publishing. There's usually a hint that standards might be
| dropped, and that open access journals aren't, well, you know, quite proper.


Merck Makes Phony Peer-Review Journal

,----[ Quote ]
| It is this attitude within companies like Merck and among doctors that allows
| scandals precisely like this to happen. While the scandals with Merck and
| Vioxx are particularly egregious, we know they are not isolated incidents.
| This one is just particularly so. If physicians would not lend their names or
| pens to these efforts, and publishers would not offer their presses, these
| publications could not exist. What doctors would have as available data would
| be peer-reviewed research and what pharmaceutical companies produce from
| their marketing departments--actual advertisements.


Merck And Elsevier Exposed For Creating Fake Peer Review Journal

,----[ Quote ]
| Of course, this is exactly the sort of thing that you can do when everything
| is locked up and proprietary, rather than open. There's almost no way to
| confirm or check the data or information to make sure it's legit, so people
| tend to assume it is. In that regard, perhaps it's no surprise that the two
| companies eventually went down this road, but it does highlight one of the
| problems with the way the system works today. As Shirky later points out this
| is hardly unique for a firm like Elsevier, which has faced some serious
| ethical questions regarding its publications in the past as well.



The serials crisis has a name, and it's Reed Elsevier.

,----[ Quote ]
| Mind you, I don't mean to imply that we should launch another boycott;
| reigning in Elsevier's profit margins and/or market share would do little to
| offset the serials crisis. The only answer to that, in the long term, is Open
| Access, because it scales where Toll access doesn't. No, this entry is not
| really about OA at all, it's just a little kick in the shins for my favorite
| Greedy Bastard Publishers.


Elsevier steals, then copyrights other people's free stuff

,----[ Quote ]
| Reed Elsevier caught copying my content without my permission:
|     I was not asked for, and did not give, permission for my work to appear
|     on that page, much less in that format. Needless to say, I felt a little
|     slighted.
|     The website in question appears to be a custom version of the LexisNexis
|     search engine. This particular version appears to be Elsevier's own
|     custom version, intended for internal use. I don't have conclusive proof
|     of that, but the title bar at the top of the page reads, "Elsevier
|     Corporate", and the person who accessed my blog from that page had an IP
|     address that's registered to MD Consult, which is an Elsevier subsidiary.
|     My guess is that Elsevier's keeping track of news articles and blog posts
|     that mention them, along with the context in which they're mentioned.
| [...]
| Reed Elsevier Is Stealing My Words:
|     I received an email from ScienceBlogling Mike Dunford that Reed Elsevier
|     had excerpted one of my posts. No problem there--I like it when people
|     read my stuff....except for one thing:
|     The fuckers copyrighted my words.
| Copyright violation?:
|     Apparently, publishing companies don't always get permission for the
|     materials they use, either. Mike Dunford caught Reed Elsevier copying his
|     content without permission (from Stephen Downes).


Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index