[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NIH as publisher
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: NIH as publisher
- From: heatherm@eln.bc.ca
- Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 18:21:40 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
One of Joe's basic questions is whether governments should get involved in publishing. There is nothing new about government publishing. Governments everywhere, at all levels, have been publishing all along. Good thing, too - a government that is not publishing anything, is either very secretive or not doing anything at all. The question of the appropriate boundaries of the public and private spheres is a separate question. Leaving aside the question of PubChem altogether, it is my opinion that not only PubChem, but all of our chemical knowledge belongs in the public sphere, as open access. Here is my position, in brief, with links to more detailed messages: Chemistry and the Public Interest: we have urgent, global problems, such as global warming and environmental damage, for which there are answers in the chemical literature. Environmental clean-up needs to happen around the globe. Every community has a right to find out what they are dealing with. This requires all the specific information, but also all the resources, period, so that every community can afford to educate chemists. https://mx2.arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/Message/1946.html Chemistry, open access, and the corporate sector: the present system of high subscription prices, funding not only publications but the good works of the society as well, does not serve corporations well. Many cannot afford the products. Those which can, however, would be better off donating money for the good works, rather than being forced to pay through subscriptions. Donations can be written off against taxes; subscriptions cannot. Donations can be increased and decreased depending on the company's fortunes, while a subscription-based service can mean loss of access to needed information at a critical time when the company needs it most. https://mx2.arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/Message/1947.html For those interested in details about the fight for PubChem, good resources are Peter Suber's Open Access News blog at http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html or the SPARC Open Access Forum at https://mx2.arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/List.html A personal view by, Heather Morrison Flash: no one every died from copyright circumvention. Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture,Penguin, 2004. Open Access version: http://free-culture.org/freecontent/ Some purchase options: http://free-culture.org/get-it/ This statement may be copied and redistributed under Creative Commons (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0).
- Prev by Date: Re: NIH as publisher
- Next by Date: RE: Berkeley faculty statement on scholarly publishing
- Previous by thread: Re: NIH as publisher
- Next by thread: June issue of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter
- Index(es):