[Open-access] Fwd: [GOAL] Fight Publishing Lobby's Latest "FIRST" Act to Delay OA - Nth Successor to PRISM, RWA etc.

Thu Nov 14 23:06:52 UTC 2013

We could have seen this coming. Publishers seem to be fairly confident that
Open Access is a movement that will not be able to breach their businesses.
There are people, and I am one of them who have said from the onset that
allowing embargo periods for publishers was the wrong strategy. Now is the
time to really demand free and immediate access to all publications and
nothing less.
A large number of open access journals show this is a valid option
Best

TOM

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> I think anyone can reply to this
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum at gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 4:26 AM
> Subject: [GOAL] Fight Publishing Lobby's Latest "FIRST" Act to Delay OA -
> Nth Successor to PRISM, RWA etc.
> To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal at eprints.org>
> Cc: "scholcomm at ala.org" <scholcomm at ala.org>
>
>
> They never stop trying! Please help defeat the publishing lobby's latest
> attempt to keep filibustering OA for as long as humanly tolerable.
>
> (And 1st implement the immediate-deposit mandate & Button<http://t.co/ql2i5VOBYg>,
> which take the wind out of the sails of publisher OA embargoes.)
>
> Stevan Harnad
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nick Shockey <nick at arl.org>
> Date: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:25 PM
> Subject: [sparc-oaforum] Call to Action: Oppose Section 302 of the
> proposed FIRST Act
> To: SPARC Open Access Forum <sparc-oaforum at arl.org>
>
> A discussion draft of the Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science and
> Technology Act of 2013 (FIRST), currently being circulated within the House
> Science Committee, would impose significant barriers to the
> public’s ability to access taxpayer funded research by restricting federal
> science agencies’ ability to provide timely, equitable, online access to
> articles and data reporting on the results of research that they support.
>
> One provision of the proposed bill – Section 302 – would extend the
> embargo period after which federally funded research must be made
> freely available *to up to three years after publication*.  This
> extension would undercut federal agencies’ ability to effectively implement
> the widely-supported White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
> Directive on Public Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research,
> undermine the public access program pioneered by the National Institutes of
> Health (NIH), and significantly hurt the utility of US public access policy.
>
> You can learn more about Section 302 of the proposed FIRST Act and how it
> would delay public access to publicly funded research on the SPARC website:
> http://www.sparc.arl.org/advocacy/national/first.
>
> *SPARC asks supporters of Open Access to take the following steps to
> ensure Section 302 doesn’t roll back the White House Directive:*
>
>
>    1. *Ask your representatives in Congress to oppose language in the
>    proposed FIRST Act to delay public access (Section 302) now through our
>    Legislative Action Center: http://www.congressweb.com/SPARC/22
>    <http://www.congressweb.com/SPARC/22>*
>    2. Tweet at your legislators to oppose Section 302 of the FIRST Act
>    and directly at Representative Lamar Smith (@LamarSmithTX21), Chairman of
>    the House Science Committee.
>    3. Forward this call to action or a link to the SPARC action page for
>    the FIRST Act to friends, colleagues, and email lists.  Post about the bill
>    to personal or organizational social media channels.
>    4. Write an op-ed or letter to the editor about Section 302 of the
>    FIRST Act for your local or campus newspaper, blog, or other publication
>    outlet.
>
> Thanks in advance for your support in ensuring Section 302 does not become
> law.
>
> Best,
>
> Nick
>
> Nick Shockey
> Director, Right to Research Coalition
> Director of Student Advocacy, SPARC
> nick at arl.org
> +1 202 296 2296
> Skype: nick.shockey
>  http://www.righttoresearch.org
> *http://www.arl.org/sparc <http://www.arl.org/sparc>*
>
>  --
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "SPARC OA Forum" group.
> To post to this group, send email to sparc-oaforum at arl.org
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe at arl.org
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe at arl.org.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-access mailing list
> open-access at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
>
>

-- 
Tom Olijhoek
Codex Consult
www.codexconsult.eu
coordinator @ccess open access working group  at OKF
DOAJ  member of Advisory Board
freelance advisor for the WorldBank Publishing Group
TEL +(31)645540804
SKYPE tom.olijhoek
Twitter   @ccess
LinkedIn  http://nl.linkedin.com/in/tomolijhoek/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20131115/619aa6f2/attachment-0002.html>