Open Access News

News from the open access movement

Thursday, December 27, 2007

More on the NIH victory

Here are some notes from the celebration around the web:

From John Gordon at Gordon's Notes:

...I'd also like to thank the biomedical publishing industry. This could never have happened without the transformation of a cottage industry into short-sighted publicly traded corporations dedicated to maximizing near term revenue. Publishers pushed journal subscription and archive access prices to stratospheric levels, knowing their subscribers had no real options. It was a great short term strategy....

From Stevan Harnad at Open Access Archivangelism:

Worldwide, that now makes 21 funder-mandates, 11 institutional-mandates, and 3 departmental-mandates, plus 5 proposed-funder-mandates, 1 proposed-institutional-mandate, and 2 proposed-multi-institutional-mandates -- a total of 35 mandates already adopted and 8 more proposed so far. See ROARMAP....

From Glyn Moody at Open...:

...[E]ven though the choice of 12 rather than six months is slightly pusillanimous, it's still a huge win for open access in the US. It will also have a knock-on effect around the world, as open access to publicly-funded research starts to become the norm....

From Peter Murray-Rust on A Scientist and the Web:

...[N]ow all fulltext derived from NIH work will be available on PubMed. Other funders will follow suit (if they are not ahead). So our journal-eating-robot OSCAR will have huge amounts of text to mine.

The good news is that we believe that this text-mining will, in itself, uncover new science. How much we don’t know, but we hope it’s significant. And if so, that will be a further argument for freeing the fulltext of every science publication.

Also see the shorter comments by Charles Bailey, Jonathan Eisen, Klaus Graf, Leslie Johnston, Paula Kaufman, Oliver Obst, Dorothea Salo, and the discussion thread about it on Slashdot.