so this company "Flow Science" in the US searched for papers that cited their software, cross referenced the authors with their customer list.
-
so this company "Flow Science" in the US searched for papers that cited their software, cross referenced the authors with their customer list. they tried to shake down some authors in India -- which has very different intellectual property laws than the US -- who pirated the software by offering them 'retroactive licenses.' when they wouldn't pay, Flow Science contacted Elsevier to have the paper retracted, which they did. Elsevier then claims that "it is the journal's responsibility to ensure that pirated software isn't used" as if they didn't own the journal. Right.
-
@jonny i thought their responsibility was to advance science?
not that they have a clue what they're doing.
-
@jonny oh man the comments
It’s mind boggling that on a site that’s supposed to be about scientific integrity, that unauthorized copying of intellectual property isn’t seen as theft.
yeah i dunno, it's almost like they're all publically funded or something
-
@dysfun lol DOG it's almost as if software piracy, especially against the background of global informational imperialism, is a different ethical category than siphoning off a ton of public resources to pay yourself and inflate your ego by making a bunch of shit up and probably causing a bunch of emotional harm to everyone around you!
-
But some of you find a software version of plagiarism, known as copyright violation, absolutely, 100% OK. Don’t you think you are applying double standards here?
-
@[email protected] @[email protected] “software version of plagiarism” ohhhhh wow, that’s… that’s quite a stretch, to put it mildly.
No, CoPilot is software plagiarism
