“What's with these people?” he asked. “They've even sued my cancer research company.”
June 25, 2009 11:58 AM Subscribe
Hank Asher, billionaire eccentric philanthropist/data miner, is being sued by publishing giant Elsevier. “What's with these people? They've even sued my cancer research company.” On the one hand, Asher used to smuggle cocaine. On the other hand, Elsevier has their own problems.
They're so, so evil. As a science librarian in charge of our serials/databases, they're really the bane of my existence. This is my first FPP though, so I tried to refrain from editorializing or getting put on the naughty list by saying "OMG EVIL EVIL".
posted by booknerd at 12:28 PM on June 25, 2009
posted by booknerd at 12:28 PM on June 25, 2009
From the article:
posted by boo_radley at 12:29 PM on June 25, 2009
Asher has said publicly that TLFO is doing only charitable work to help in the hunt for child predators until his non-compete expires, the suit alleges that Asher is already angling for market share.That's a tidy angle to have: " You win. I'll stop my charity to prevent pedophiles from stalking children."
posted by boo_radley at 12:29 PM on June 25, 2009
You never really think about the big publishers when you send your articles off to little journals... interesting stuff, thanks.
posted by sararah at 12:42 PM on June 25, 2009
posted by sararah at 12:42 PM on June 25, 2009
boo_radly, I was just coming to quote that line. Throwing that card in that way means that Asher is guilty, guilty, guilty.
posted by Malor at 12:52 PM on June 25, 2009
posted by Malor at 12:52 PM on June 25, 2009
Elsevier is also the publisher of famed fake journal Chaos, Solitons, and Fractals. Note: part of Elsevier's business model is bundling crappy journals (some fake, apparently) with the journals scholars want and requiring libraries to buy them as a group.
posted by Nelson at 12:55 PM on June 25, 2009
posted by Nelson at 12:55 PM on June 25, 2009
Since the post and comments don't say, here is the theory of Elsevier's lawsuit: Asher sold a database business to Elsevier, under a five-year noncompete agreement. Asher started up a new database venture within the noncompete period. Elsevier asserts that Asher's new business competes in violation of their contract, among other ways marketing his new products to law enforcement agencies under the guise of charitable use. (I.e., using free "charitable" giveaways to establish market share, which he will charge for after the noncompete period is up.)
I don't know that the lawsuit is correct -- that depends on a lot of details. But it's just an attempt to hold Asher to the terms of a sales contract. If anyone would like to explain how this is evil, that would be cool.
posted by grobstein at 12:58 PM on June 25, 2009
I don't know that the lawsuit is correct -- that depends on a lot of details. But it's just an attempt to hold Asher to the terms of a sales contract. If anyone would like to explain how this is evil, that would be cool.
posted by grobstein at 12:58 PM on June 25, 2009
Heh heh, from the first link:
“Je veux trouver un mur de vert, s’il vous plaît,” Asher declares genially with no French accent at all to his driver when he settles his formidable frame into the backseat of the car. The driver, as Asher has noted, is a French-speaking Haitian. As he heads west toward New Jersey’s Teterboro Airport, the driver looks perplexed. “Qu’est-ce que vous voulez?”posted by XMLicious at 1:15 PM on June 25, 2009 [4 favorites]
“Un mur de vert,” Asher repeats.
“Un mur de vert?” the driver echoes.
“I want to find a fucking WALGREENS!” Asher exclaims.
Oh man I love the comment on that Nature blurb -- you know the one where Elsevier was offering Amazon gift cards to their authors for 5-star review of Elsevier products -- "I do hope Elsevier are building a secret base on their own Caribbean island, surrounded by sharks with lasers. If they're going to act like an evil company, they should do it properly."
That would explain the Arms Fairs Reed Elsevier used to organize.
posted by sebastienbailard at 1:29 PM on June 25, 2009
That would explain the Arms Fairs Reed Elsevier used to organize.
posted by sebastienbailard at 1:29 PM on June 25, 2009
They're so, so evil. As a science librarian in charge of our serials/databases, they're really the bane of my existence. This is my first FPP though, so I tried to refrain from editorializing or getting put on the naughty list by saying "OMG EVIL EVIL".
Good post, thanks!
posted by 7segment at 2:33 PM on June 25, 2009
If anyone would like to explain how this is evil, that would be cool.
I'm just saying they're evil because, among other things, they charge libraries extortionary rates for access to scientific literature, pass a great deal of marketing material off as "peer-reviewed scholarly literature", and have resorted to bribing academics for favorable reviews of their products. If you're asking me to explain/justify the post, I just thought the articles were interesting and potentially MeFi-worthy.
Asher seems nuts, and it's entirely possible what he's doing is violating the non-compete agreement. However, it's very clear that he uses a great deal of his money for charitable purposes (apparently right now his thing is cancer research, according to one of those articles). Elsevier, on the other hand, vigorously opposes open access to research in the name of protecting scientific rigor, while engaging in shady practices that undermine the very thing they're purporting to protect. It's hard not to root for them to fail, just on principle.
posted by booknerd at 2:41 PM on June 25, 2009
I'm just saying they're evil because, among other things, they charge libraries extortionary rates for access to scientific literature, pass a great deal of marketing material off as "peer-reviewed scholarly literature", and have resorted to bribing academics for favorable reviews of their products. If you're asking me to explain/justify the post, I just thought the articles were interesting and potentially MeFi-worthy.
Asher seems nuts, and it's entirely possible what he's doing is violating the non-compete agreement. However, it's very clear that he uses a great deal of his money for charitable purposes (apparently right now his thing is cancer research, according to one of those articles). Elsevier, on the other hand, vigorously opposes open access to research in the name of protecting scientific rigor, while engaging in shady practices that undermine the very thing they're purporting to protect. It's hard not to root for them to fail, just on principle.
posted by booknerd at 2:41 PM on June 25, 2009
*reads post* ...
*reads comments* ...
*quietly closes open Geomorphology .pdf, backs away*
posted by six-or-six-thirty at 3:00 PM on June 25, 2009
*reads comments* ...
*quietly closes open Geomorphology .pdf, backs away*
posted by six-or-six-thirty at 3:00 PM on June 25, 2009
I'm just saying they're evil because, among other things, they charge libraries extortionary rates for access to scientific literature, pass a great deal of marketing material off as "peer-reviewed scholarly literature", and have resorted to bribing academics for favorable reviews of their products.
Yes, that is hideous. But it has nothing to do with the matter of this lawsuit. "I'm a goodguy and he's a badguy," is not a defense to breach of contract. (Nor, dare I say, should it be.)
I felt like the post was purporting to be about this lawsuit, but most of the text (and ensuing discussion) is about which of the parties is most evil in matters wholly orthogonal to the lawsuit.
posted by grobstein at 3:45 PM on June 25, 2009 [1 favorite]
Yes, that is hideous. But it has nothing to do with the matter of this lawsuit. "I'm a goodguy and he's a badguy," is not a defense to breach of contract. (Nor, dare I say, should it be.)
I felt like the post was purporting to be about this lawsuit, but most of the text (and ensuing discussion) is about which of the parties is most evil in matters wholly orthogonal to the lawsuit.
posted by grobstein at 3:45 PM on June 25, 2009 [1 favorite]
That was a fascinating article, thanks. I especially liked the fact that this guy picked up computer programming so quickly.
posted by dhruva at 4:02 PM on June 25, 2009
posted by dhruva at 4:02 PM on June 25, 2009
I briefly worked as an editorial assistant for the editor of an Elsevier journal. I handled the paperwork end of the peer review process. As far as I knew, there was legitimate science occurring. But when the publishers came to town? Man, we ate well. Lunches at expensive restaurants all over town. First class. Expense accounts.
Then they cut our budget, consolidated the editorial staff, and laid me off.
Cost-cutting measures. Belt-tightening.
So I got a job bartending again, at a great restaurant where I was making more money.
Guess who was eating there three months later? Yup, the editor and the publishing staff, and some new guys who'd flown down with them from New York. The new editorial staff, meeting the editor. Way to tighten that belt, guys.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 5:52 PM on June 25, 2009
Then they cut our budget, consolidated the editorial staff, and laid me off.
Cost-cutting measures. Belt-tightening.
So I got a job bartending again, at a great restaurant where I was making more money.
Guess who was eating there three months later? Yup, the editor and the publishing staff, and some new guys who'd flown down with them from New York. The new editorial staff, meeting the editor. Way to tighten that belt, guys.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 5:52 PM on June 25, 2009
Wholly orthogonal?? Awesome. Holy Orthogonality, Batman!!
posted by spicynuts at 6:03 AM on June 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by spicynuts at 6:03 AM on June 26, 2009 [1 favorite]
« Older Baloney Detection Kit | The Success of Development Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by jessamyn at 12:02 PM on June 25, 2009 [2 favorites]