The CRS itself prefers the current system, under which the public release of one of its reports requires the approval of the member of Congress who commissioned it. This according to a recent but undated internal memo obtained by Secrecy News. In an accompanying note, the editors of Secrecy News point out that "Most of the arguments presented in the CRS memo are refuted by the record of the U.S. General Accounting Office, another congressional support agency that publishes reports online daily with no adverse impact on performance or productivity." I'd add that all CRS reports make their way to the public already, although most in priced editions based on copies surreptitiously obtained by a private-sector publisher. The CRS arguments work best when access depends on consent of the commissioning member of Congress. Since we've long since abandoned that system, the government should remove the price barrier and give taxpayers what we've already paid for. (Thanks to ResourceShelf.)
Posted by
Peter Suber at 12/27/2003 01:12:00 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.
