Access to scientific articles and books continues to be a luxury for millions of students, researchers and independent scholars around the world. The high-fee subscription systems of major publishing houses such as Elsevier, Wiley and Springer greatly limit scientific production and education, especially in developing countries. Born in this environment, “illegal open access” platforms such as Sci-Hub and Library Genesis (LibGen) have become symbols of free access to information, while at the same time sitting at the center of the copyright debate.
Sci-Hub (https://sci-hub.se or alternative mirrors): Founded in 2011 by Kazakh software developer and neuroscientist Alexandra Elbakyan. Offers free access to academic articles.
LibGen / BookSC: An open access repository offering a wide range of PDF files, from scientific books to textbooks. Users often choose these portals to access academic publications without paying a fee.
These sites have been closed down or blocked by court orders many times. But they have managed to keep coming back with new domains. Sci-Hub’s servers have moved to countries like Russia, the Netherlands, Sweden, and most recently Ecuador. LibGen’s mirrors are still accessible on the Tor network or alternative domains.
US publishers have filed multi-billion dollar lawsuits against Sci-Hub. In 2017, Elsevier won a lawsuit against Sci-Hub, receiving $15 million in damages. However, the site has continued to operate.
Piracy or Academic Solidarity?
These platforms are clearly violating copyright laws. But their supporters defend this violation as an ethical challenge. Here are some common justifications:
- Publicly Funded Information Should Be Public: “Why should tax-funded research require payment again?”
- A Lifeline for Developing Countries: Sci-Hub can be the only source for individuals without institutional access.
- Publishers’ Excessive Profit Margins: It is unfair that scientists make huge profits from content that is written and reviewed for free.
On the other hand, many academics and publisher representatives argue that copyright violations harm the scientific ecosystem and undermine quality publishing.
In 2021, the journal Science reported that more than 70% of the 28 million download requests made to Sci-Hub came from countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Brazil, Egypt, and Turkey (https://datadryad.org/dataset/doi%3A10.5061/dryad.q447c).
According to Nature’s 2016 analysis, 25% of Sci-Hub users come from universities with institutional access, suggesting that speed, not access, is also a motivation (https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news/early-career-researchers-herald-change).
In many countries, open access platforms (arXiv, PubMed Central, DOAJ) are supported, but many current publications are still behind paywalls. Initiatives such as Plan S are trying to force publicly funded research into open access.
In Turkey, despite steps such as the National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education, access to scientific publications is still limited. This increases the need for resources such as Sci-Hub.
Sci-Hub and LibGen are symptoms of a much deeper problem beyond copyright laws: If there is no fair access to information, then science is not equal. These platforms are not legal, but their existence raises an ethical question: Whose right is information?
