On 25-Aug-10, at 5:31 AM, Hélène.Bosc wrote: Heather morrison said: "As all of us who have followed the Am Sci discussion list over the years know very well, one of the major obstacles to green OA mandates has been publisher opposition... "
Heather, I have been following the AmSci Forum discussion list for many years, but I cannot remember seeing anything to the effect that "the major obstacle to green OA mandates has been publisher opposition"... Could you specify what you meant, by giving us the links to these discussions in the archives of the forum? Hélène Bosc hi Helene, The Alliance for Taxpayer Access follows progress on the proposed U.S. Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA). The ATA page can be found here: http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/ An illustration of the current status of the debate can be found in the Summary of the July 29th Committee hearing on FRPAA, available here: http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/issues/access/access_resources/10-0814.shtml In brief, this summary clearly indicates opposition to FRPAA basically on business grounds by some traditional publisher representatives, as well as pro-public access proponents. To me, it is noteworthy that PLoS' Catherine Nancarrow is among the latter group. From my perspective, this illustrates very well how open access publishing (gold OA) supports open access archiving mandates, in two ways: 1) countering opposition arguments by showing that there is a viable business model for open access publishing and 2) direct support for open access archiving mandates. Since open access archive mandates is a key focus for this forum, I am assuming that long-time followers would likely be aware that OA mandates are vigorously opposed by some in the publishing community, for business reasons. best, Heather Morrison PhD Student, SFU School of Communication http://pages.cmns.sfu.ca/heather-morrison/ The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com
