Re: Critique of APS Critique of NIH Proposal

["James A. Robinson" <jim.robinson@stanford.edu>]

> One example:  the reference to the Paperwork Reduction Act.  A quick
> glance at the Paperwork Reduction Act at
> http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/public_laws/
> paperwork_reduction_act/3501.html makes it immediately obvious that the
> NIH proposal is in complete synch with the goals of this act.  For
> example, the 2nd purposes of the Act is to:  "ensure the greatest possible
> public benefit from and maximize the utility of information created,
> collected, maintained, used, shared and disseminated by or for the Federal
> Government;".  It doesn't take much brainpower to realize that making NIH
> research results openly accessible precisely fits the goals of this act.

But publication by non-government entities (the publisher) is not by or
for the Federal Government, is it?  I think your example is out of
context, since the only way it would apply would be if the NIH was
directly paying the publisher for the publication to occur, right?

Jim

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
James A. Robinson                       jim.robinson@stanford.edu
Stanford University HighWire Press      http://highwire.stanford.edu/
650-723-7294 (W) 650-725-9335 (F)