[open-science] open access perils? (#RIP @aaronscwarz)

Sat Jan 12 16:16:04 UTC 2013

On 12 January 2013 15:25, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:

> i'd say if we do not keep count of how many people are marginalised
> for doing REAL work in the front line
> we are definitely not being scientific nor seeking truth about what is
> happening in reality in relation to OA....
>

I can see where you're going with it, but I feel that making this sort of
'martyrs list' almost canonizes the people on it. That's a dangerous game
to play.

Also, not everyone agrees about what should be open - this list is about
openness in science, and of the three names you give, only Swartz was
handling scientific knowledge. That I support open access to scientific
research doesn't automatically imply that I support disclosure of political
information through Wikileaks.

Finally, we are usually careful to work within the law, trying to get it
changed where we think it is unjust. Civil disobedience has its place in
changing the law, but we may not all agree on what actions are justifiable.

> SIDENOTE I do not want to go into specifics here
> however please note that there was no rape charge raised in the case
> of Assange before the wikileaks case was made against him. this could
> possibly mean that the entire international legal system can be
> manipulated ...
>

That's a very big conclusion to draw from very little evidence. The
publicly available facts are simply insufficient to say whether the charges
against him in Sweden are genuine.

Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20130112/9a46993c/attachment-0001.html>