[GOAL] Re: Research Works Act & AAP Members

[Stevan Harnad]

Sandy Thatcher wrote onLibLicense-L Discussion Forum:

> a better approach... would be to require any government agency that
> funds research to require...  a final report...
> to be posted immediately upon acceptance... openly accessible to all 

The primary intended users of refereed research articles
are researchers; A "final report" is not what they need, and
it's not what OA is about: the refereed final draft is.

> this approach is preferable because, unlike the current NIH
> policy, (1) it would make the research results immediately available
> (not after a 12-month delay...

What's needed immediately is the refereed research. What would be
preferable would be no 12-month delay...

> (2) it would
> make the results available in the exact form in which they were
> written up and not in the Green OA version 

A " final report" is not the "exact form" in which results were written
up: the author's final, refereed draft (Green OA) is.

> citation of a final report is a preferable form of scholarship than
> citation of a preliminary version of an article, which may differ in
> significant respects from the archival version.

What researchers  use and cite is the refereed article.

> I am not sure why people are claiming that publishers like Elsevier,
> by supporting the Research Works Act, are opposed to the dissemination
> of knowledge. Many AAP-member publishers, including Elsevier (and Penn
> State Press), permit authors of articles in the journals they publish
> to post Green OA versions on their institutional or personal web
> sites.

And RWA would prevent their funders from requiring them to do it.

Stevan Harnad