Professor Tsinghua complained that CNKI squeezed the rights of scholars and periodicals: hate and love, and split physically and mentally

Recently, the 2021 Annual China Network Governance Case was announced in Beijing. "Ninety Professor Zhao Dexin v. CNKI" was selected as one of the top ten judicial cases of network governance in 2021.

The surging news reporter noted that Zhong Weimin, a well-known scholar, professor of the Department of History of Tsinghua University, doctoral supervisor, and executive deputy editor of the Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), published an article "I See CNKI and Professor Zhao's Lawsuit" through the official WeChat public account of the Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) on January 6, and expressed his views on the matter of "Ninety Professor Zhao Dexin v. CNKI".

In response to Professor Zhong Weimin's comments, CNKI staff responded to the surging news on the 13th and said that CNKI, authors and journals have maintained communication channels.

Zhong Weimin wrote in the article: "The recent news that 'Professor Zhao Dexin sued CNKI for compensation' has shaken the academic and publishing circles, and the vast number of scholars and editorial departments have never paid so much attention to this matter as they do now." Although the case was temporarily settled, the problem was not fundamentally resolved. Especially for CNKI, if more scholars stand up to defend their rights, what will CNKI do? Full compensation, the family may be completely lost; no compensation, the responsibility is passed on to the editorial department, it is tantamount to self-defeating, because a large number of powerless academic journals are the parents of CNKI. Perhaps, history has reached a certain point, CNKI must sit down and seriously discuss the relationship with the editorial department and the author and try to solve it, and the traditional ostrich policy may not work. ”

"CNKI's traditional approach is to sign an agreement with the author through the journal or editorial department, so as to obtain the author's authorization as a package, and avoid direct contact with the author or try to make the author give up his rights and interests." This proved to be unworkable, as more and more authors began to stand up for their rights. Not to mention that the fee paid by CNKI to the editorial department and the author is extremely low, and it is difficult for the editorial department to perform secondary distribution; moreover, at present, almost all academic journals are sponsored by public institutions, and the income and expenditure management is strict, and the fees paid by CNKI are actually school income, and the editorial department has no right to dispose of it (unless the school clearly stipulates that it is allowed). It is precisely because of this that our editorial department and CNKI have not signed any agreements for many years, and we do not take a penny from CNKI. ”

In this regard, Zhong Weimin analyzed: "No matter from what aspect, it is difficult to implement this traditional practice of CNKI anymore. Personally, I believe that there are only two feasible practices for CNKI: one is that all the paper resources originating from domestic academic journals are OA (free and open), academic services are publicly beneficial, and the fees are limited to service projects or customized projects, or overseas subscribers; the other is to formulate a system of revenue sharing with readers and editorial departments as soon as possible, calculated according to the actual download volume, as for what proportion, you can refer to relevant industry experience and relevant legal regulations. ”

"However, it is a pity that I have not only not seen CNKI's efforts in this regard, but even farther and farther away from the wishes and requirements of the author and the editorial department. First, CNKI is still trying to find ways to sign exclusive agreements with various journals, which shows that CNKI not only does not have the idea of OA, but also wants to monopolize, further and tries to completely monopolize the academic paper market. Such an approach is tantamount to running counter to antitrust law, and it is also inconsistent with the wishes of readers and editorial boards, so it is impossible to go far. Second, the current agreements signed by CNKI and various companies, whether it is the remuneration to the editorial department or the remuneration to the author, are very low, but the fee for downloading papers is very high, which is disproportionate to the huge profits of CNKI in the past 20 years, and it is unfair to the author and the editorial department. Such an act will not prevent more scholars from standing up to defend their rights in the future, and it is also likely that some academic journals will refuse to cooperate with CNKI. Once this situation occurs, CNKI is in danger! ”

"Of course, we must also see that although everyone has great opinions on CNKI, we cannot deny the great efforts and contributions made by CNKI, and the great convenience brought by CNKI to academic research." Without CNKI, current academic research will be greatly affected; without CNKI, some master's and doctoral papers may not be completed at all. Therefore, we do not hope to see more scholars come out to defend their rights, nor do we want to see the collapse of CNKI, but we hope that it will continue to develop, and hope that it will develop healthily under the premise of respecting the rights of scholars and editorial boards and abiding by relevant laws and regulations. ”

"Unfortunately, such a strange circle has been formed: CNKI relies on the extraction of the rights of scholars and academic journals, which has led to authors and academic journals being very dissatisfied with CNKI; but now, with the continuous expansion of CNKI users, not only scholars cannot do without CNKI, academic journals are also inseparable from CNKI." Hate and love, body and mind are divided, and now even more so! ”

Zhong Weimin analyzed from the perspective of his own experience: "As an old editor, the old editor-in-chief, my heart is very complicated, everyone often discusses, often speaks out, but the results are very small, becoming the most annoying thing. why? Because our carefully edited academic journals, to CNKI, have all become a pot of stew, the intentions of the editor-in-chief and editors, the characteristics of magazines and columns, etc. have all disappeared, and we have no choice. Worse still, with the development of the Internet and digital technology, CNKI has increasingly become a resource relied on by academic journals and authors. For journals, paper subscribers are getting fewer and fewer, some journals are even zero subscribers, academic communication basically or completely rely on digital platforms; in several major domestic academic digital platforms, CNKI is the absolute leader, and its current status is unshakable. This means that academic journals not only dare not offend CNKI, but even often ask FOR KNOWLEDGE, for fear that their papers will not be disseminated to CNKI. Even the situation is completely reversed: CNKI seems to have become the parent of academic journals! ”

Zhong Weimin said: "In addition, almost all domestic academic journals are single-handed, dispersed in strength, and are career grants, so at present, few academic journals are fighting lawsuits with CNKI. The academic journals of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences are relatively concentrated, and almost all of them are the most authoritative journals in the country, and they have tried to resist CNKI in a group, but they did not expect that in the end, because of the great impact on the dissemination, the cited data fell sharply, and they had to reconcile with CNKI. In the end, the two sides made concessions, and the journals of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences continued to be published on CNKI, but the time was slightly delayed, and CNKI paid a certain fee to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. In my opinion, neither side is a winner. Untie the bell by tying the bell! I don't know if this statement is correct, but it is only for the reference of CNKI and your readers. ”

According to public information, Zhong Weimin worked at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences from 1988 to 2005, serving as the editor and reviewer of China Social Sciences and Historical Research, the deputy director of the editor-in-chief office, and the executive deputy editor of China Social Science Digest. From 2009 to 2015, he was the deputy director of the Liberal Arts Construction Department of Tsinghua University. He is also the vice president and secretary general of the National Colleges and Universities Liberal Arts Newspaper Research Association, and the executive director of the Chinese Economic History Society.

Zhong Weimin's monographs include "Tea and Opium: China in the Nineteenth Century Economic Globalization" (Sanlian Bookstore, 2009), "Song Shenzong" (Jilin Literature and History Publishing House, 1997), etc., and has published many papers. In 2010, he was awarded the title of "National Leading Talent in the Press and Publication Industry" by the General Administration of Press and Publication.

In response to Professor Zhong Weimin's mention of "the current agreements signed between CNKI and each company are unfair to the author and the editorial department", CNKI staff told the surging news reporter on the 13th that CNKI, authors and journals have maintained communication channels. However, for the attitude of authors and journals that feel "unfair", many departments within CNKI have not given a clear answer.