Comment. Unfortunately, several of the editorial's arguments are deeply flawed:
The biggest gaffe is confusing HR 6845, the Conyers bill (which we have covered previously), with supporting OA; in fact, the opposite is true.
The editorial also seems to assume that manuscripts subject to the NIH policy could not be published by commercial publishers. But there are extensive resources for authors on publishers' policies to allow authors to comply; a long list of journals even handles submission to PubMed Central on the author's behalf.
Posted by
Gavin Baker at 10/07/2008 03:57:00 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.