That link opened all the pages at ReadCube for me, at least in Chrome. I must say, their description is super-confusing: who gets to pass out these magic links that blow past the ReadCube blur barrier -- a subscriber to one of the 49 can disseminate all 49 or just that one? Is the url tricked-out so it is associated somehow as coming from an approved subscriber?
Authors already have a right (indeed a duty under NIH and Wellcome grant rules) to provide a copy and some do, most conveniently at ResearchGate.
Enable 100+ media outlets and blogs to link to a read-only version of full text-subscription articles
This makes sense from their perspective -- tons more visits to their sites. Perhaps Neven could write them and get the blog and forums what they call whitelisted. Are they then blocking access to the paper url unless it comes from an approved site?
ReadCube itself has been in flux lately. For a time, they allowed a free 5' preview to registrants before blurring, one per day. That has disappeared because people could take screenshots and ocr. They've now bumped the minimal per article viewing to $6, too high for regular use.
Meanwhile, nature.com does not cover the ground in terms of climate change articles. Every day, policies in the journal sphere get more bizarre. Some AGU journals are now providing full size figures and captions, sometimes first pages and end citations but on the whole, professional societies are among the very worst hoarders.
It all leaks out in the end -- makes no sense to combat entropy, it only increases.
