“Our immediate priority is to secure authors publishing company-funded research the same right to publish open access as authors publishing research funded by other sources, so that all research can be made free to read from the date of publication. This would enable pharmaceutical companies to follow the lead of other research funders in requiring all the research they fund to be published with open access, without impacting on journal choice.5-7 In order to provide publishers the time to adapt their policies and protect their copyright interests, any variant of Creative Commons or equivalent licence could be used….
Our long-term goal is to secure authors publishing company-funded research the same terms as authors publishing research funded by other sources, so that all research can be made free to read – and reuse – from the date of publication….”
“We followed two guiding principles in creating this opportunity:
First, we didn’t want to limit funding to pure software development. Open source is more than just writing code. It includes improving documentation, addressing usability, managing the project, and building community. We want to provide opportunities in whatever form will help make the computational foundations of biological research more usable and robust….
Second, we wanted to be inclusive in defining the scope of what counts as essential software for biomedical research. The proposed work does not need to be tied to novel research. Additionally, both domain-specific software and foundational tools and infrastructure used across several domains of science will be eligible to apply, so long as they have some impact in biomedical science. Such foundational tools can range from data structures to numerical computation libraries to toolkits for workflow execution and reproducibility. These tools play a critical role, often acting as dependencies for more domain-specific tools….”
“The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative will soon invite applications for open source software projects that are essential to biomedical research. Applicants can request funding between $50k and $250k for one year. This RFA is the first of a series. CZI will invite applications during three distinct cycles, with rounds beginning June 18, 2019; mid-December 2019; and mid-June 2020. Read our Medium post to learn more….”
“The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is excited to announce the addition of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) as its newest member. HHMI is an independent philanthropy that supports basic biomedical scientists and educators with the potential for transformative impact. HHMI has long viewed the sharing of research materials and tools as a fundamental responsibility of the scientific endeavor. The ORFG is pleased to add the Howard Hughes Medical Institute to the growing roster of research funders working to enable the open sharing of research outputs….”
In October 2018, Riksbankens Jubileumsfond joined Coalition S. The Riksbankens Jubileumsfond is one of Sweden’s largest private research funders and has for more than a decade worked to support and promote Open Science. Our Board of Directors has unanimously supported the idea of Open Science and Open Access, as demonstrated in our guidelines for OA publishing, adopted in 2010. In November 2018, Plan S was announced as the Coalition’s shared plan for moving further towards the aim ofmaking science open and accessible. Since then, a number of open consultations both internationally and nationally have taken place. As a consequence of observations made in these consultations, the Board ofRJ has on 28 February 2019 decided the following: RJ remains in the Coalition S, but cannot support Plan S in its current form….
To a large extent Plan S has been launched without dialogue with those who are most affected by the Plan. Through this modus operandi Plan S has succeeded to turn researchers who have been in favour of Open Science and Robert Merton’s CUDOS principles against these positions. This is an unfortunate development. The time-frame for implementation of Plan S is generally, among affected researchers, found to be unrealistic, and there are a number of conditions in Plan S which need further clarification or added flexibility. Plan S, as it is now presented, risks affecting the quality ofscientific publishing, including having a negative impact on the career paths of younger scholars. …”
“We require our grantees to contribute to open science in several ways, including:
Depositing software code to an open repository such as GitHub;
Submitting results to open-access preprint servers like bioRxiv upon submission to a peer-reviewed journal, if not earlier;
Making experimental protocols openly accessible….”
These challenges helped us identify a new technology platform for developing and sharing protocols. Protocols.io is an open access resource that allows researchers to discover and share up-to-date science methods, similar to the way code can be shared on GitHub. …”
“We, the undersigned, are researchers who believe that the world’s scholarly literature is a public resource that only achieves its full value when it is freely available to all. For too long we have tolerated a pay-for-access business model for scholarly journals that is inequitable, impedes progress in our fields, and denies the public the full benefit of our work. We therefore welcome efforts on the part of public and private research funders to require that publications based on work they fund be made immediately freely and openly available without restrictions on access or use.
Funders are uniquely positioned to transform scholarly publishing by changing the explicit and implicit rules under which we all operate. We recognize that funder mandates may superficially limit our publishing options in the short term, but believe they will lead to a system that optimizes what we really care about: maximizing the reach of our scholarship and its value to the research community and public.
We understand that effective scholarly communication costs money, and support substantial investment in this endeavor, but only if it allows everyone to freely access and use the scholarly literature. We acknowledge that challenges remain, especially ensuring that all scholars everywhere have the unfettered ability to freely share their work and have their contributions recognized. And we therefore commit to continue working with funders, universities, research institutions and other stakeholders until we have created a stable, fair, effective and open system of scholarly communication….”
“New Rochelle, NY, June 23, 2016—Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers announces the launch of Health Equity, a new peer-reviewed open access journal that will address the urgent need for authoritative information about health disparities and health equity among vulnerable populations. Content will range from translational research to prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and management of disease and illness toward the goal of optimal outcomes and ultimately health equity for all. Health Equity will launch an inaugural issue in fall 2016 and will be published open access to ensure broad and timely distribution of information without barriers to access.”
“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation strongly supports the Wellcome Trust’s call for the open sharing of all research findings and data relevant to the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. We agree that it is imperative that research and data should be shared rapidly and openly during this and all future public health emergencies….”