Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new (50 items) |
- More Policy Threats to Open Archaeology
- Reinventing the Scientific Method - IEEE Spectrum
- Public access to research reports not peer-reviewed research: two major flaws in the argument
- The Scholarly Poor could lose access to scientific research; this is serious
- Around the Web: Some posts on The Research Works Act
- The Research Works Act: asking the public to pay twice for scientific knowledge. | Doing Good Science, Scientific American Blog Network
- My Argument for Public Access to Research Reports
- ACH response to White House RFIs on open access to research | Association for Computers and the Humanities
- Oblivious Supreme Court poised to legalize medical patents
- Gov. Cuomo signs landmark open-government law
- Research Works Act H.R.3699: The Private Publishing Tail Trying To Wag The Public Research Dog, Yet Again
- What can we do? Strike. When should we do it? Now.
- Digital tools for the scientific endeavour – one response to the changing world of science
- Building High-Capacity Partnerships: From Contests to a Lifecycle of Open Data Co-Creation | Promoting Information and Communications for Development (IC4D)
- Library License
- If Libraries Didn't Exist, Would Publishers Be Trying To Kill Book Lending? | Techdirt
- The Librarian’s Guide to Micropublishing: Get it!
- How Attaching Smartphones to Microscopes Could Change Global Health
- OPEN ACCESS TO PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH: PUBLISHERS ARE ACTING UP | MalariaWorld
- Raising the barriers: restricting access to scientific literature will hurt STEM education
| More Policy Threats to Open Archaeology Posted: 07 Jan 2012 01:11 PM PST Digging Digitally, (06 Jan 2012) "On the heels of SOPA, a bill that will make libraries vulnerable to lawsuits and felony charges for trying to do essential library functions (preservation and access to cultural works), comes another worrisome piece of legislation. The problematic bill is H.R. 3699, the “Research Works Act“. Basically, the aim of the bill is to step back from recent reforms advocated by the “open science” community and prohibit federal agencies from requiring open access to the outcomes of grant funded research....In some ways I can’t believe that we’re still having these fights; the broken status quo is very, very deeply entrenched. I wonder what would happen if libraries would just cancel subscriptions in mass. Perhaps then we’ll see some pretty rapid adoption of open access...." |
| Reinventing the Scientific Method - IEEE Spectrum Posted: 07 Jan 2012 01:08 PM PST spectrum.ieee.org "Two very big examples, very broad examples are data sharing and code sharing, both of which are things which in most disciplines people don’t get a whole lot of credit for. Very often there’s a lot of very important scientific knowledge locked up in, for example, code, which you might use to do all sorts of data processing in the laboratory or simulations or whatever. And yet, when I talk to people who write a lot of code as part of their scientific job, they’ll say that very often they’re extremely reluctant to release that code publicly because well, first of all, it’ll end up being a pain; they’ll have all sorts of support and maintenance requests from other people. And second, it’s not something they can use as part of their tenure case; it’s just not something they get a whole lot of credit for....So the largest single open project that I’ve done, not surprisingly, is writing my book. It was a four-year-long project, and a funny little thing—which was the most useful thing, ultimately—was actually just using a public bookmarking service to share the research that I was doing. So when I’d see something that was interesting, an interesting paper or interesting news article or blog post, I’d bookmark it so it would be publicly shared, and then there’s a discussion site called FriendFeed, which would allow little discussions to take place around that. And at first not very many people were commenting, but ultimately it’s this little community of people who see a lot of these bookmarks and provided in some cases really remarkable extra information. They’d debunk it or they’d follow it up or say, “You should be looking at this or that or whatever.” And I think I ended up sharing about 1500 or so links there, and I got thousands of comments from hundreds of people, and certainly the book’s a lot better than it otherwise would have been as a result. And I used the same pattern, in fact in all of the research that I do now...." |
| Public access to research reports not peer-reviewed research: two major flaws in the argument Posted: 07 Jan 2012 01:00 PM PST The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics, (07 Jan 2012) "David Wojick at the Scholarly Kitchen argues for public access to research reports, not peer-reviewed articles. For the benefit of those unfamiliar with open access policy, note that this comes in the context of the recent revelation that the American Association of Publishers is lauding the Research Works Act which would forbid any U.S. federal funding agency from requiring public access to the results of research that it funds.... a peer review overlay system built on repositories would cost less than half the costs of the current subscriptions model. And this system does include peer review! So if the peer review that scholarly journal publishers isn't important enough to be required as part of an open access policy, then perhaps the best approach is to scrap - not the policy, but the journal system altogether. This would give significant economic relief to universities around the world struggling with the current difficult economic climate...." |
| The Scholarly Poor could lose access to scientific research; this is serious Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:58 PM PST petermr's blog, (06 Jan 2012) "I’ve already blogged about the proposed Bill in congress (HR 3699) but it is one of the most serious threats to scientific liberty. YOU must challenge this....Almost everyone is Scholarly Poor. They have no access to medical articles other than paying 40 USD per day for each one. They are denied access to life-saving knowledge for the greater good of preserving the publishing industry. (In case you didn’t understand the AAP blurb – the industry aren’t being subsidized – they are highly profitable – not surprising, as academics give them the knowledge and then pay them to get it back)....And the NIH itself cannot lobby. I’ve been through this before, where the ACS tried to restrict the scope of Pubchem (sic) as it threatened the ACS’s revenues. The NIH had to remain mute. It was up to US to protest, and we did, and we just saved Pubchem. This is even more serious. We are in the middle of one of the great struggles of human knowledge. Every day we see example sof those trying to widen our horizons and those dragging it back. For one motive only – profit...." |
| Around the Web: Some posts on The Research Works Act Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:55 PM PST Confessions of a Science Librarian, (06 Jan 2012) "Following on my post from yesterday on Scholarly Societies: It's time to abandon the AAP over The Research Works Act, I [John Dupuis] thought I'd gather together some of the recent posts on the issue...." |
| Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:53 PM PST blogs.scientificamerican.com "Let’s take this at the most basic level. If public money is used to fund scientific research, does the public have a legitimate expectation that the knowledge produced by that research will be shared with the public? If not, why not? (Is the public allocating scarce public funds to scientific knowledge-building simply to prop up that sector of the economy and/or keep the scientists off the streets?) Assuming that the public has the right to share in the knowledge built on the public’s dime, should the public have to pay to access that knowledge (at around $30 per article) from a private sector journal? The text of the Research Works Act suggests that such private sector journals add value to the research that they publish in the form of peer review and editing. Note, however, that peer review for scientific journals is generally done by other scientists in the relevant field for free...." |
| My Argument for Public Access to Research Reports Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:51 PM PST The Scholarly Kitchen, (06 Jan 2012) "Since the OSTP RFI on public access to the results of federally funded research has been extended until January 12, I decided to add to my first Kitchen article presenting my case for using research reports instead of journal articles to meet the mandate...." |
| Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:50 PM PST ach.org "Today, the ACH [Association for Computers and the Humanities] issued a response (PDF) to two Requests for Information made by the US White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. On behalf of the digital humanities community we represent, ACH strongly advocates open access to federally-funded research and research publications, and the inclusion of humanities voices in these crucial conversations. We urge ACH members and other interested individuals to respond as well...." |
| Oblivious Supreme Court poised to legalize medical patents Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:48 PM PST arstechnica.com "The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in a case that raises a fundamental question: whether a physician can infringe a patent merely by using scientific research to inform her treatment decisions. Unfortunately, this issue was barely mentioned in Wednesday's arguments. A number of influential organizations had filed briefs warning of the dire consequences of allowing medical patents, but their arguments were largely ignored in the courtroom. Instead, everyone seemed to agree that medical patents were legal in general, and focused on the narrow question of whether the specific patent in the case was overly broad...." |
| Gov. Cuomo signs landmark open-government law Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:42 PM PST The New York World, (04 Jan 2012) "Yesterday, following months of uncertainty, Governor Cuomo signed into law a measure that will require state and local agencies to make available all resolutions and related documents to be discussed at public meetings to be made available before or at the meeting – on the agency’s website, if it has one that it regularly updates. Currently, documents in many instances are made available following the meeting or not at all. Agencies are exempted from the requirement if compliance is too expensive or exceedingly onerous...." |
| Posted: 07 Jan 2012 12:35 PM PST Open Access Archivangelism, (07 Jan 2012) "If public tax money is used to fund research, that research becomes "private research" once a publisher "adds value" to it by managing the peer review." [Comment: Researchers do the peer review for the publisher for free, just as researchers give their papers to the publisher for free, together with the exclusive right to sell subscriptions to it, on-paper and online, seeking and receiving no fee or royalty in return]. "Since that public research has thereby been transformed into "private research," and the publisher's property, the government that funded it with public tax money should not be allowed to require the funded author to make it accessible for free online for those users who cannot afford subscription access." [Comment: The author's sole purpose in doing and publishing the research, without seeking any fee or royalties, is so that all potential users can access, use and build upon it, in further research and applications, to the benefit of the public that funded it; this is also the sole purpose for which public tax money is used to fund research.]" |
| What can we do? Strike. When should we do it? Now. Posted: 07 Jan 2012 11:25 AM PST gavialib.com "A previous commenter didn’t hold out much hope about librarians doing anything about the house of chicanery that is scholarly publishing. Chicanery? Too strong a word? The Loon thinks not. Consider Elsevier, for instance. They are on record supporting SOPA, and if that sufficeth not, they bought and paid for the Research Works Act. There’s at least one thing we can do. Strike, even as the University of California threatened to Nature Publishing Group. Without our articles, our review labor, our editorial work, what price Elsevier’s information journals? ..." |
| Digital tools for the scientific endeavour – one response to the changing world of science Posted: 07 Jan 2012 11:02 AM PST In Verba, (05 Jan 2012) "New mechanisms for sharing data allow experiments to be replicated to verify or refine scientific findings. Data sharing prevents duplication of experimental findings and accelerates the scientific process. Making datasets reusable allows data to be ‘repurposed’: imagine temperature measurements made by the Met Office reused and recycled to study the effect of temperature on wildlife; or linking drugs that affect the activity of genes to chemical databases to accelerate drug discovery. Greater openness with scientific data may also lead to interdisciplinary collaborations and attract investment from a wider range of organisations. But how can data be more openly accessible? There is a range of software developers who are working on projects designed to help scientists make the most of new technologies – bringing more data to more people. A few will be covered below...." |
| Posted: 07 Jan 2012 10:57 AM PST blogs.worldbank.org "This spring the World Bank will partner with the Government of Moldova and a range of stakeholders to organize a competitive Open Innovation Hackathon focused on the reuse of open data in Moldova. This is more than just another apps competition, which generate both enthusiasm and skepticism for their ability to promote innovative and sustainable reuse of open data. Our aim is to help build a high-capacity ecosystem around Moldova’s open data. Working with data is hard - and the Bank has a real opportunity to help foster long-term capacity within countries and communities to better leverage open data for faster innovation and smarter development...." |
| Posted: 07 Jan 2012 10:53 AM PST librarylicense.org From Jeff Goldenson: "LIBRARY LICENSE CONCEPT: Grant libraries non-commercial access to copyrighted material on a defined time horizon. Content producers could add a Library License to the terms of their publishing contracts....[For example] LL5, After 5 years, full digital rights are granted to libraries. LL0, Immediate digital rights granted concurrently with commercial launch. LL5-DPLA, After 5 years, full digital rights are granted to the Digital Public Library of America. LL5-Harvard, After 5 years, full digital rights are granted to those with access to the Harvard Library. LL$, A dynamic LL tied to sales or other performance-based thresholds...." |
| If Libraries Didn't Exist, Would Publishers Be Trying To Kill Book Lending? | Techdirt Posted: 07 Jan 2012 10:48 AM PST www.techdirt.com "Against the background of today's war on sharing, exemplified by SOPA and PIPA, traditional libraries underline an inconvenient truth: allowing people to share things – principally books in the case of libraries – does not lead to the collapse of the industry trying to sell those same things. But publishers really don't seem to have learned that lesson....This suggests that if libraries didn't exist, and somebody tried to set one up, publishers would use the same logic to refuse to sell traditional books for that purpose. History shows that's an absurd position, but equally absurd are the efforts of publishers to make borrowing ebooks less convenient...." |
| The Librarian’s Guide to Micropublishing: Get it! Posted: 07 Jan 2012 10:45 AM PST walt.lishost.org "I [Walt Crawford] am delighted to say that _The Librarian’s Guide to Micropublishing: Helping Patrons and Communities Use Free and Low-Cost Publishing Tools to Tell Their Stories_ is now available....This book is primarily written for public libraries, but one chapter focuses on academic libraries and micropublishing, primarily discussing ejournals. To wit: If your academic library is getting into the open access ejournal business, aren’t there a few authors and libraries who would happily pay to see their work in book form? You can add an annual print edition (assuming the journal publishes less than 750 pages per year) with zero financial outlay or risk, although in this case you do need a copy of Acrobat. The book shows you how...." |
| How Attaching Smartphones to Microscopes Could Change Global Health Posted: 07 Jan 2012 10:41 AM PST mashable.com "To make diagnosing from a distance more viable, [Andrew Miller] and his co-founder Tess Bakke developed a simple plastic smartphone holder called Skylight that turns any microscope into a camera. After attaching any camera-phone to any microscope, users can easily take photos and videos of diagnostic slides and share them with doctors elsewhere via email, text or video conferencing...." |
| OPEN ACCESS TO PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH: PUBLISHERS ARE ACTING UP | MalariaWorld Posted: 07 Jan 2012 08:48 AM PST www.malariaworld.org oppose the bill HR 3699 |
| Raising the barriers: restricting access to scientific literature will hurt STEM education Posted: 07 Jan 2012 07:49 AM PST Discovering Biology in a Digital World, (06 Jan 2012) "This morning, I learned that congress wants to reverse the advances made by NIH and go back to restricting access to scientific publications....In an era where the economic benefits of educating students in science are well-known (1), the idea of crippling science education by cutting off access to the primary literature is puzzling. If anything, I would expect congress to support science education by asking the National Science Foundation (NSF) to follow NIH's lead and require that publications from NSF funded research be made open access, too. Instead, bill H.R. 3699 will roll back the NIH Public Access Policy and block similar policies at other federal agencies. The effects would be horrific. Maloney and Issa might not be aware of this, but faculty and students at 1,167 community and technical colleges will be negatively impacted by this bill (2). Many community college faculty rely on open access materials. Not only are these publications important tools for keeping our understanding current, we rely on these publications to help educate our students...." |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment