[2Gkashmiri]

why? what is the "benefit of elsevier"? beyond holding copyright to the work of others which they give away for free, what value addition does elsevier bring to the table that cant be done otherwise? if the argument is that they provide classification and other stuff, why cant you just dump everything on schihub and let people do the organization themselves?

remember a few hundred years ago, horse drawn carts were a big business but cars drew them to extinction. should we bring back horse drawn carts monopoly of the old just because they were something once?

on a sidenote, why arent authors and researchers publishing on scihub directly?

[pkaye]

> on a sidenote, why arent authors and researchers publishing on scihub directly?

Because Elsevier own prestigious journals that authors want to publish on. Its like saying why compete in the Olympics when you can compete in your local races.

[2Gkashmiri]

why dont they dual publish or does publishing on elsevier make you forfeit the right to publish elsewhere ? publish on elsevier and simultaneously publish on scihub also? what is the problem in that?

[pkaye]

I don't follow this issue in detail but I think Elsevier edits the drafts so you are not free to publish it elsewhere unless you pay extra to make it open access. The other option is to publish the draft copies elsewhere before Elsevier touches it.

[ausbin]

> on a sidenote, why arent authors and researchers publishing on scihub directly?

Many compsci/physics/math researchers already submit preprints (or post-prints even) of their papers to arXiv, which is public: https://arxiv.org/. I'm confused, is there a reason why they should they submit to Sci-Hub too?

[Y_Y]

They're not always quite the same, often arxiv have doesn't updates reflecting changes during the publication process (not including formatting). Can be annoying, the can be subtle differences and people aren't really careful about which versions they use or cite.