Jonathan is looking for legal ways to access the information.
His main point is that Science made it hard to access the data (but they did make it possible!) and his secondary point is the terms under which they made it possible were pretty silly (basically, opt-in to spam with no way to easily opt-out until you get the first spam and unsubscribe).
I dunno. Actually I think this is what victory feels like for open access publishing, as implemented by the incumbents (who have kicked and dragged their heels on this). It's not clear this is a battle worth fighting; scientists are used to working hard to get data, and if they really want to read a paper in Science (that is available for free), well, you just walked them through the process. It's onerous, but I suspect other battles (like being able to store and process all the documents on the science website via high-throughput means) are more important for the progress of science.
Sure - this is a small fight. I wrote the post not to get AAAS to provide access to such papers really. I wrote it to point out just how hard AAAS works to make stuff inaccessible. They are generally anti-sharing. And there is no way in hell they would let everyone access the full text of all papers. So it would be better for everyone if nobody published there.
In this case, as he's represented he's the author of the article in question and owner of its copyright, it really doesn't matter where he gets it from -- he isn't infringing his own copyright.
