Mark's personal bookmarks used in researching the article on del.icio.us and may be updated with new links occasionally.
Second "What's Wrong With Scientific Publishing?" event:
Caltech
Calendar entry
Date: Wednesday November 28, 2007 3:30 PM - 5:30 PM
Location: Beckman Institute auditorium
speaker: Jasna Markovac, former senior vice president at Elsevier
NEWS FLASHBush vetoed the appropriations bill that contained the NIH PubMED Central open access requirement. So if you have an opinion on this, you may want to make sure your congresscritters know that it should remain in any revised bill, unless they override the veto.
The PubMED publication requirement is contained in the 2008 appropriations bill for Labor, Health and Human Services and Education (S. 1710).
Kimberly Douglas kindly provided me with the actual wording in S. 1710:
SEC. 221. The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall require that all investigators funded by the NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication: Provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law.
This wording is included in both the House and Senate versions, so it would be a done deal except that Bush is threatening to veto the whole bill for budget reasons unrelated to scientific publishing, which leaves a window for a lobbying campaign to change this in a future version that isn't vetoed, unless the veto is overridden.
The House Appropriations Committee summary (pdf)
The Washington Post article on the bill
Note that this is misreported a bit in the Washington Post article above, which implies open format was allowed, while the bill actually specifically says PubMed, see here for some additional explication.
Kim Douglas has prepared a great resource for researching scientific publishing
JournalFire is a great project started by CNS student John Delacruz to try to apply Web 2.0 innovations to journal article evaluation and sharing. There is a forum there devoted to followup discussion for the panel series on the future of scientific publishing.
There is a great summary of the first panel discussion in September, which drew a large crowd despite being only announced on a few departmental email lists.
CNS Professor Gilles Laurent is participating in the new "Frontiers" journal project.
Nature article on Congress and NIH open access
A blogger at Nature offers a view of the perspective from the journal publishing side
Slashdot article with links to backlash-to-PRISM information
Suggestions for student activism to address some of these issues
Forms which can be added as addendums to journal's copyright agreements to legally allow the author to retain some rights instead of handing all rights over to the publisher. Part of the Science Commons project associated with the Creative Commons.
the SPARC open access newsletter which has a specific article about the NIH bill