The Fall 2004 issue of the Professional/Scholarly Publishing Bulletin is now online. In his Chairman's Corner column, Marc Brodsky shows the PSP at its most heroic --opposing the Treasury Department use of trade embargoes to limit the editing of scientific research articles-- and its most mystical --repeating its bizarre claim that toll-access literature can be more accessible than open-access literature. Excerpt: "There is a great concern among many PSP member publishers that [the NIH open-access] mandate would undermine many publications that provide wide and useful access --perhaps wider and more useful access than NLM could-- to biomedical research results." (PS: Since this is the only objection to the NIH plan mentioned in this issue of the Bulletin, it may be the PSP's principal objection. If so, it's the perfect point on which to place the burden of proof.)
The PSP has also put on its web site a template grassroots memo (DOC format) for members to use when opposing the NIH OA plan. It must be intended for external constituents, not the NIH, since it makes claims about the NIH and its OA plan that the NIH will know to be false.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 10/22/2004 08:33:00 AM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
