David Sainsbury, Open access is not only science publishing model, Financial Times, November 10, 2004 (access limited to subscribers). A letter to the editor in response to FT's editorial of November 9 criticizing the UK government response to the OA report. Sainsbury is the UK Under-Secretary of State for Science and Innovation, Department of Trade and Industry, and helped compose the UK government response. Excerpt from his letter: 'In your editorial on open-access publishing you seem to misunderstand both the government's position and the nature of open-access publishing. As was made very clear in our response to the Commons science committee, the government is very happy to see users of research in this country having a choice between traditional "subscriber pays" publishing and open-access publishing. That is why it is making certain that there is a level playing-field by encouraging the research councils to support scientists wanting to take the open-access route.'
(PS: Like the 11/9 editorial, this letter focuses on OA journals and ignores OA archiving, the primary recommendation of the select committee report. I'm still looking for a government response to the criticism that its reply gave primary attention to a secondary issue, and dismissed the report's primary recommendation about OA archiving with irrelevant considerations based on the economics of OA journals.)
Posted by
Peter Suber at 11/12/2004 07:57:00 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.
