[Open-access] Science 2.0 position papers

[Peter Murray-Rust]

Many thanks,



On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Pierre-Carl Langlais <
pierrecarl.langlais at gmail.com> wrote:

>  Hi everyone,
>
> The EU program Science 2.0 leads a consultation on the future of
> scientific research. It has published several interesting responses
> <http://scienceintransition.eu/position-papers/> from leading european
> public institutions, publishers, and organisations.
>
> There is not much novelties in the documents per se. For instance, the
> response
> <https://scienceintransition.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/reed-elsevier.pdf>
> of Elsevier merely reiterates its strong objections regarding legal
> intervention on Open Access and Text and Data Mining.
>
> Thanks for highlighting this. OKFN, and also TheContentMine, have publicly
opposed Elsevier's "arguments" at, for example, Licences for Europe.

Nevertheless, juding from the high proportion of pro-OA responses, the
> balance of power seems to shift at the expense of Elsevier & co (which, not
> long ago, were in a position to dictate the main EU process on TDM,
> Licences for Europe).
>

Constant, rational, strong advocacy will win out. The rest of Europe is
looking to the UK/Hargreaves  legislation and how it will improve science
and generate wealth. We in UK are committed to showing the value.

As it's legal to carry out non-commercial research in the UK using TDM
*without* publishers' consent, contentmine.org would be very interested in
non-UK research where we can help, non-commercially, with the TDM aspect of
the research.



-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20141203/17cbcc5c/attachment-0002.html>