Open Access News

News from the open access movement


Monday, January 03, 2005

More on the NIH plan

Lila Guterman, Critics and Proponents Debate NIH's Plan to Free Access to Scientific Materials, Chronicle of Higher Education, January 7, 2005 (accessible only to subscribers). Excerpt: 'Proponents and critics of open access have had a lot to talk about these days as they anxiously await the U.S. government's final plan to make large swaths of scientific literature freely available....Dr. Zerhouni characterized the comments, a fraction of which the agency has posted on its Web site, as "overwhelmingly supportive." Indeed, Richard K. Johnson, director of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, or Sparc, called the draft plan "a brilliant compromise."...One scientific-society executive who requested anonymity said that many publishers object to any new government intrusion into the process. They fear that other agencies that finance research will adopt the NIH approach and go even further. "It ain't going to stop with six months," the executive said. The second element of compromise is that the NIH will only request, not require, that researchers send them copies of their papers. Dr. Zerhouni told The Chronicle that that provision was included so that members of scientific societies who might be hurt by the public archive could decline to participate. Patricia S. Schroeder, a former congresswoman who is president of the Association of American Publishers, doubts the efficacy of that step. "The NIH is this two-ton gorilla," she said, because it is the country's largest provider of research grants. "You don't dare not comply with it, really."'