Research works Act ?

[mikel]

Has anyone heard of this yet? Its called the research works act, you can google and its not really out there in the open. Everything that Ive read about it and what Doctors are saying is kind of strange. The bill is supposed to limit public access to federally funded research by the private sector. Its passing will destroy websites such as NIH and PUBMED... I know that paramedics in general wont necessarily be affected per se, but those type of websites are wonderful tools for diagnosing and treatments in many developing countries and great study tools for people who are practicing or studying medicine or who are building research upon already founded studies. Im curious about this that not more publicity has been made but if someone else has some info on this, please share your thoughts...

[b.anderson]

I haven't heard of it until now. This seems like a step backwards in terms of sharing scientific research and a step forward for the government to make some more money. Shouldn't the people paying (the taxpayers) for the research be able to access the information with relative ease? I'd be interested to hear the opinions of some of the more politically-minded individuals here. My grasp on politics is admittedly low.

[Kiwiology]

Seems like a bunch of bullshit if you ask me, but then again most politics is ....

[Bieber]

This is the first time I'm hearing about it too. It would be a shame if we lost some of the great reference and learning tools available to us.

[systemet]

I didn't know about this until I read this thread, so thanks OP!

There's a little bit of discussion about it here:

http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/867-guid.html

Right now, when the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds research, one of the requirements is that the finished work is submitted to Pubmed Central, where it can be read for free by anyone. So the Research Works act won't prevent indexing on PubMed, you'd still be able to search and find abstracts, but it means that NIH can't require the authors to publish the entire full text open access of Pubmed Central, or an equivalent site.

This is something the journal publishers want. Because right now, when they accept NIH funded work, it gets published in their journal, but it's also disseminated via Pubmed Central. So they can't get money for reprints of the article, and no one is going to purchase a subscription to read an article that's available for free on-line.

The researchers producing a given work don't make money from it directly. In fact, in some cases, they actually pay the journal publishers "page fee's" to have it printed in a journal, which can be several thousand dollars, that has to come from a grant somewhere. No matter how many times the article is cited, or downloaded, or purchased, the research group doesn't see the money. They only benefit from a publication in a good journal on their CV, which helps their reputation, and helps their scoring when they apply for new grants.

So this is about making money for journal publishers, who are feeling a lot of pressure as more and more science becomes on-line and open access. Now, personally, I'm not sure why they're so interested in this, as very few people buy individual subscriptions to the different journals, as they're very expensive, consider a yearly subscription to the following journals:

Nature $199

PNAS (say it as a word! Seriously, it's a real journal) $385

New England Journal of Medicine $148 (special offer)

Annals of Emergency Medicine $254

Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery $516

But I guess the big money is in getting private organisations, like research companies, or universities to sign up for institutional subscriptions:

Nature $ probably a lot

PNAS $4,000-$9,000 (to any institution actually doing research)

New England Journal of Medicine $4-26,000

Annals of Emergency Medicine $3,000-$9,000 (to any institution actually doing research)

Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery $923

So, I guess the journal publishers feel a little threatened. Perhaps any university has to subscribe to the top tier journals. But maybe they feel that the NIH open access is making the universities less willing to pay for licences for the smaller less widely-read specialty journals.

The sad thing here, is that the researchers are using public US taxpayer money, often having to pay a journal to have their work published, or best case, giving it away for free. And then the journals want to be able to make this work their private property, and charge money for it. Seems a little strange.

This isn't solely a US issue, as a lot of researchers work with groups that receive NIH grants outside the States, or spend periods of time training in US NIH funded labs in the US.