I think that posting the message about exchanging PDFs is
in danger of putting the newsgroup in breach of copyright law
(in the UK anyway). Or encouraging such a breach.
At least napster only hit record companies. This kind of
deal is more morally dubious as the proceeds from the sales of
a number of the journals indicated support scientific
societies that rely on them for funds to promote their
scientific discipline. In my area all the scientific meetings
of the UK Biochemical Society, for example, are funded
by the profits from the Biochemical Journal (including past
and upcoming symposia in exercise biochemistry). At the end
of the year all the issues are available on line free, but charities
(as these organisations are) must be allowed to make some money
in order for science to flourish. Of course this thing goes on informally
in countries with an underdeveloped science budget. For
someone from a supposedly rich European country to do
this seems to me to be reprehensible. Get your library to
buy the journal or have the courage of your convictions to campaign to
change journal's attitudes or think of ways of journal/society funding that
get around these problems. But don't kid yourselves that posting these kind
of notes is a morally neutral event - it is making a statement of civil
disobedience. So at least the newsgroup should debate whether
it wants to go this route. Aside from the moral arguments (pro and con)
there may be possible financial implications for the interface of sports
and exercise scientists with publishing companies.
--
Professor Chris Cooper
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Essex
Wivenhoe Park
Colchester
CO4 3SQ
UK

Tel:(0)1206 872752
Fax: (0)1206 872592
Mobile 07739033378
e-mail: ccooper@...
www.essex.ac.uk/bs/staff/cooper/