The American Chemical Society has updated its position statement and FAQ on PubChem. The previous version was dated May 18 (blogged here on May 19). The new version is dated May 23. The changes are not immediately evident and the ACS doesn't label them. But I believe that one addition responds to the objection that the ACS received public funding to launch CAS. The new document admits this. "The fact that NSF turned to CAS decades ago to create the Registry in no way justifies NIH in replicating it today."
(PS: The NIH says it is complementing, not replicating, the CAS, although I'd argue that NIH would be justified in replicating it, especially if it consisted of factual data assembled by publicly-funded researchers. The question is whether a private-sector organization is justified in shutting down a useful public service and demanding a monopoly on factual data partially subsidized by taxpayers. By offering open access and integration with other NIH databases, PubChem fills a vital research need.)
Posted by
Peter Suber at 5/24/2005 08:02:00 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.
