Shared genomes, Nature, December 6, 2007. An editorial. Excerpt:
...[Nature and the Nature journals] have long been freely available to researchers in the 100 or so poorest countries through the World Health Organization's Hinari initiative and others like it. Machine access is being enhanced by the open text-mining initiative of the Nature Publishing Group (NPG). Preprints of original versions of papers can be deposited in arXiv and Nature Precedings without compromising their acceptability for publication. And final authors' versions of papers can be deposited in PubMed Central and other public servers from six months after publication. Authors retain copyright of their work, whereas NPG retains the licence to publish it.
For many years, a more generous arrangement has been made for papers reporting full genome sequences. (The paper reporting the sequence and analysis of 12 species of Drosophila is the most recent example, see Nature 450, 203; 2007). These papers are freely accessible on NPG's website from the moment of publication. This recognizes a consistent character of 'genome' papers: they represent the completion of a key and fundamental research resource, describing and reflecting on what has been revealed but not usually providing insights into mechanism. Although some papers in other disciplines might also be characterized in this way, the fundamental character of the genome has led NPG to make a systematic exception.
In the continuing drive to make papers as accessible as possible, NPG is now introducing a 'creative commons' licence for the reuse of such genome papers. The licence allows non-commercial publishers, however they might be defined, to reuse the pdf and html versions of the paper. In particular, users are free to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the contribution, provided this is for non-commercial purposes, subject to the same or similar licence conditions and due attribution.
In 1996, as human genome sequencing was getting under way, leading players stated: "It was agreed that all human genomic sequence information, generated by centres funded for large-scale human sequencing, should be freely available and in the public domain in order to encourage research and development and to maximise its benefit to society" (see [the Bermuda principles]). These principles have continued to guide the field, and NPG has consistently made genome papers freely available in keeping with them. This new licence allows us to formalize the arrangement.
Comments
I applaud this policy and am especially intrigued by the principle behind it:
[Genome papers] represent the completion of a key and fundamental research resource, describing and reflecting on what has been revealed but not usually providing insights into mechanism. Although some papers in other disciplines might also be characterized in this way, the fundamental character of the genome has led NPG to make a systematic exception.
Is Nature willing (and perhaps preparing) to make the same systematic exception for equally fundamental research in other fields? Are other publishers?
It's easy to understand why research of this description is fundamental. But when we ask exactly why, according to Nature, research of this description should be OA, the answer seems to be that all fundamental research should be OA. At first, I admit, that sounds like an unfair paraphrase. But the editorial doesn't help us sharpen it. It does cite other specific features of genome research --that it completes a fundamental research resource, and reflects on what it reveals without providing insights into mechanism. But what's the connection between that specific feature and OA? Again, it seems that the answer is that research of this description is very basic and very useful. If so, the principle is of very wide application and should affect access policies (at least at Nature) on many other topics.
Update. Also see NPG's December 5 press release to accompany the editorial.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 12/06/2007 09:34:00 AM.
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.
