[GOAL] Re: Fwd: Harvard response to the White House RFI on OA to publicly funded research

[Peter Suber]

Hi Steve:  I'm blogging about the new anti-OA bill at Google+.  Please join
the conversation and spread the word.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/109377556796183035206/posts/QYAH1jSJG6L

     Peter

Peter Suber
Director, Harvard Open Access Project
Faculty Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
Senior Researcher, SPARC
gplus.to/petersuber


On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 6:05 AM, Steve Hitchcock <sh94r at ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote:

> We must be grateful for Alan M. Garber's extensive and detailed submission
> for Harvard to the White House RFI on OA to US federally funded research.
> There appear to be counter moves. Garber refers to
>
> > Some publishers have gone to the
> > legislature, and backed the so-called Fair Copyright in Research Works
> > Act (H.R. 6845 in the 110th Congress and H.R. 801 in the 111th
> > Congress), which would amend U.S. copyright law precisely to block the
> > NIH policy and to prevent other federal agencies from following its lead.
>
> I'm not familiar with the process of US legislation, but the current focus
> for publishers appears to be
>
> H.R.3699
> Latest Title: Research Works Act
> Sponsor: Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49] (introduced 12/16/2011)
> http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.3699:
>
> This is the response of the Association of American Publishers (AAP)
> Publishers Applaud “Research Works Act,” Bipartisan Legislation To End
> Government Mandates on Private-Sector Scholarly Publishing (23 Dec 2011)
> http://www.publishers.org/press/56/
>
> Can anyone explain the implications of these different legislative
> approaches, the White House RFI and H.R.3699, and how OA supporters should
> respond?
>
> Steve
> [...]
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120105/2617dad2/attachment.html