Abstract: Opposition to open access continues, and so we OA advocates continue to have much work to do, to educate people about open access, and to counter misconceptions. However, in my opinion, the failure of PRISM is so complete as to suggest the possibility that the effort to build a publishing industry anti-OA coalition has imploded. If correct, this could be an important moment in the transition to open access; publishers who are no longer united in the fight against OA, are very likely to have more time and inclination to figure out how to make OA work.
Comment. I agree that PRISM has failed, and even backfired. But the publisher anti-OA lobby is well-funded and effective. PRISM is only the public face of a lobbying campaign that continues unabated behind the scenes. For recent signs of its work, see its success in reaching out to the White House and its success in persuading Senator Inhofe to add two harmful, last-minute amendments to the appropriations bill containing the provision that would mandate OA at the NIH.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 10/20/2007 03:02:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
