Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.



American Chemical Society wins preliminary finding against Sci-Hub

Judge says the distributor of pirated papers violated ACS’s copyright and trademark protections

by Andrea Widener
October 4, 2017

A U.S. district court in Alexandria, Va., has issued a preliminary finding supporting the American Chemical Society in its case against the internet pirate site Sci-Hub.

Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson agreed that Sci-Hub violated ACS’s copyright and trademark protections when it provided free access to stolen journal articles. ACS publishes C&EN.

“Sci-Hub’s actions merit a strong deterrent,” Anderson wrote. Sci-Hub should be ordered to stop distributing ACS’s copyrighted work and imitating its trademarked content, such as web pages, he recommended. Anderson also supported ordering internet service providers, such as search engines, domain name registries, or web hosting services, to stop distributing ACS content on Sci-Hub’s site. ACS should receive the $4.8 million in damages it requested, Anderson advised.

The filing is a recommendation to Judge Leonie M. Brinkema, who will issue a final ruling, likely within the next few months.

“ACS is pleased with the recent report filed by the magistrate judge. The Society is now awaiting a final judgment in the case,” says ACS spokesperson Glenn S. Ruskin.

Sci-Hub, which is thought to be based in Russia, is unlikely to follow the final ruling. A successful case against Sci-Hub by the publisher Elsevier did not stop Sci-Hub from publishing. However, a final ruling would allow ACS to go after the internet companies that host Sci-Hub’s content. That could make distributing ACS content slightly harder for Sci-Hub.

ACS filed suit against Sci-Hub in June. No Sci-Hub representatives attended a Sept. 22 hearing to defend themselves, so the ruling supported ACS by default.



This article has been sent to the following recipient:

K (October 5, 2017 8:21 AM)
Well, duh.
Richard (October 5, 2017 7:04 PM)
Why don't we find a compromise and grant free access to literature if this literature needs to be referred to in an intended publication?

I mean this is basically extortion. If you don't pay for an article to read it, you can barely use it for a citation, but if you don't cite it, it could end in plagiarism.
P (November 1, 2017 7:48 AM)
We pay tax dollars, tax dollars pay for research grants, research grants fund the research, then we have to pay to read the results?

Sounds to me like this knowledge is already paid for, so why isn’t free?

Don’t be too greedy ACS cause the times, they are a changing.
Valindo (January 15, 2018 4:12 AM)
Remember the disruption of the music and movie industries? Well you're next, ACS and Elsevier!

The scientific publishing industry is one of the biggest scams in the world. The researchers have realised it and we're gonna rip you apart slowly but surely. And no amount of lobbying/bribing the judges will change that. We are smarter than you are. We will attack you in ways you cannot imagine.

TL;DR: Scihub is here to stay like PirateBay.

The times, they are a changing.

Leave A Comment

*Required to comment