ISCB Public Policy Statement on Open Access to Scientific and Technical Research Literature | Bioinformatics | Oxford Academic

The International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) is dedicated to advancing human knowledge at the intersection of computation and life sciences. On behalf of the ISCB members, this public policy statement expresses strong support for open access, reuse, integration, and distillation of the publicly-funded archival scientific and technical research literature, and for the infrastructure to achieve that goal.

Support Diego Gomez: An Update

“Last Summer, we learnt about the case of Diego Gomez. Diego Gomez, a Colombian graduate student, currently faces up to eight years in prison for doing something thousands of researchers do every day: posting research results online for those who would not otherwise have a way to access them.”

CapitolHillCoffeeHouse: “Open Access” or Covert Propaganda? by Alan Caruba – Oct 15, 06

“This innocent sounding bill [FRPAA] might better be called ‘The Advancement of Junk Science Act of 2006.’

All the government-funded studies, whether having merit or redolent with hidden agendas, would be available to become a platform by which various social agendas would be advanced. 

Nothing truly impedes anyone from access to published research studies; it’s available for those who want to read it.  ‘Open access’, however, is an invitation for more clueless journalism and covert advocacy….

This bill literally forces publishers of medical, scientific and scholarly journals, which invest hundreds of millions of dollars each year in their publications, to give away their work. There is something inherently wrong in that.  The Open Access bill is, in this respect, an unconstitutional ‘taking’ of intellectual property by the federal government.

So, what starts out appearing to be a reasonable mandate based on federal funding turns out to be bad news for everyone; from those doing the research to those publishing the research. Ultimately the unskilled consumers of ‘open access’ could also be at risk inasmuch as they are unaware of whether the material they’re reading has any real merit. 

Another way to further debase the process that supports questionable science is to create ‘alternative journals.’ It should come as little surprise that liberal financier George Soros, through his Open Society Institute, is a big fan of ‘open access’ and alternative journals….”

CapitolHillCoffeeHouse: “Open Access” or Covert Propaganda? by Alan Caruba – Oct 15, 06

“This innocent sounding bill [FRPAA] might better be called ‘The Advancement of Junk Science Act of 2006.’

All the government-funded studies, whether having merit or redolent with hidden agendas, would be available to become a platform by which various social agendas would be advanced. 

Nothing truly impedes anyone from access to published research studies; it’s available for those who want to read it.  ‘Open access’, however, is an invitation for more clueless journalism and covert advocacy….

This bill literally forces publishers of medical, scientific and scholarly journals, which invest hundreds of millions of dollars each year in their publications, to give away their work. There is something inherently wrong in that.  The Open Access bill is, in this respect, an unconstitutional ‘taking’ of intellectual property by the federal government.

So, what starts out appearing to be a reasonable mandate based on federal funding turns out to be bad news for everyone; from those doing the research to those publishing the research. Ultimately the unskilled consumers of ‘open access’ could also be at risk inasmuch as they are unaware of whether the material they’re reading has any real merit. 

Another way to further debase the process that supports questionable science is to create ‘alternative journals.’ It should come as little surprise that liberal financier George Soros, through his Open Society Institute, is a big fan of ‘open access’ and alternative journals….”

Ceased and transferred publications and archiving: best practices and room for improvement | Sustaining the Knowledge Commons / Soutenir les savoirs communs

Highlights

The purpose of this post is to highlight some good practices when journals cease, some situations to avoid, and room for improvement in current practice. In brief, my advice is that when you cease to publish a journal, it is a good practice to continue to list the journal on your website, continue to provide access to content (archived on your website or another such as CLOCKSS, a LOCKKS network, or other archiving services such as national libraries that may be available to you), and link the reader interested in the journal to where the content can be found.

 

This is an area where even the best practices to date leave some room for improvement. CLOCKSS archiving is a great example of state-of-the-art but CLOCKSS’ statements and practice indicate some common misunderstandings about copyright and Creative Commons licenses. In brief, author copyright and CC licenses and journal-level CC licensing are not compatible. Third parties such as CLOCKSS should not add CC licenses as these are waivers of copyright. CC licenses may be useful tools for archives, however archiving requires archives; the licenses on their own are not sufficient for this purpose.

Data mining: why the EU’s proposed copyright measures get it wrong – An opinion by Prof. Kretschmer and Dr. Margoni published in The Conversation | CREATe

This is an interesting time for EU copyright law. In order to offer a comprehensive overview of a complex process, CREATe has collected various resources available here, here and here. To synthesize, it could be said that within the EU copyright reform package, which is intended to “modernise” EU copyright law, the Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market stands out for its numerous provisions. Some of those have been object of a great deal of attention from academics, lawyers and citizens in general as they will significantly change the current EU copyright framework. And not necessarily in the right direction. In an opinion published today in The Conversation (here) CREATe’s Martin Kretschmer and Thomas Margoni discuss one of these provisions, dedicated to Text and Data Mining (TDM).

 

Book to the Future – a book liberation manifesto

“The Book Liberation Manifesto is an exploration of publishing outside of current corporate constraints and beyond the confines of book piracy. We believe that knowledge should be in free circulation to benefit humankind, which means an equitable and vibrant economy to support publishing, instead of the prevailing capitalist hand-me-down system of Sisyphean economic sustainability. Readers and books have been forced into pirate libraries, while sales channels have been monopolised by the big Internet giants which exact extortionate fees from publishers. We have three proposals. First, publications should be free-at-the-point-of-reading under a variety of open intellectual property regimes. Second, they should become fully digital — in order to facilitate ready reuse, distribution, algorithmic and computational use. Finally, Open Source software for publishing should be treated as public infrastructure, with sustained research and investment. The result of such robust infrastructures will mean lower costs for manufacturing and faster publishing lifecycles, so that publishers and publics will be more readily able to afford to invent new futures….”

Fair Open Access Alliance

“The mission of the foundation is

a. to promote and support initiatives concerning (Fair) Open Access publications in the broadest sense;

b. to acquire resources and financially sustain (Fair) Open Access publications;

c. to support foundations financially and otherwise in various disciplines (xxxOA’s) that pursue the same goals;

d. to expand the Open Library of Humanities to other disciplines.

e. to propagate and promote the principles of Fair Open Access over all disciplines of science. “