Disrupting access to scholarly journals III

OK, part 3. Here is part 1 and part 2.
I made the rookie mistake of not following the ICanHazPDF etiquette: I did not provide a DOI for the article I requested.
No surprise – two weeks later, I have still not received a PDF.

This morning I tried again. Tweetdeck was supplied with a tweet containing the DOI, the hash-tag and my mailadress, and tasked to tweet at 9.00 AM local time.

9.03 my tweet was retweeted by @shecanhazpdf.

9.31 I recieved an e-mail with the subject “Yes, you can haz :)” – and the PDF. Please note: This is a paper that I have co-authored and that I have legal access to, through my work.

Where did it come from? Good question. The first rule of Fightclub is that you do not talk about Fightclub. Similarly, you do not reveal who fulfilled your request. Odds are that whoever helped me, is breaking a license agreement. The e-mailadress I got the PDF from is rather anonymous, but it is a good guess that the owner is a night elf hunter from the same timezone as Denmark. Not that it matters, but it would be interesting to hear what motivation there is behind the mail.

Anyway. Our Inter-Library-Loan department is quick, but probably not that quick. This was a test. The result is clear: Make your request in the proper way, and it is fulfilled in 30 minutes.

Is this going to disrupt the access to scholarly journals, provided by libraries?