Unrestricted dissemination of your articles via PubMed Central can increase the impact and visibility of your work; recent studies have shown that articles that are available without subscriptions or other financial barriers are cited more frequently and appropriately than those that are not (Antelman, K., "Do Open Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact?" College and Research Libraries, Sept. 2004). Due to the rising subscription costs libraries face, many of your colleagues and virtually all members of the public can't access your papers. [From 1998-2003, the average price of an academic journal increased at more than five times the rate of inflation, according to a United Kingdom Parliamentary Committee's findings.] -- The proposed NIH policy will not put you in conflict with journal policies - many publishers already deposit their articles in PMC voluntarily, some, like PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine, immediately upon publication, others with a delay of two to twelve months or more. None have seen any decline in their subscription bases, although some have seen evidence of increased interest in their journals (see http://www.biomedcentral.com/openaccess/archive/?page=features&issue=6) -- The proposed NIH policy accommodates a variety of publishing models and favors none - it simply states that the NIH, as a federal funding agency supported by the taxpayers, is committed to sharing the results of the research it supports with the public. Smita Chandra wrote: Apologies for cross posting. Note: forwarded message attached. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a

ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:01:00 -0800 From: george@library.caltech.edu Subject: Opportunity to voice your thoughts on the NIH Public Access Policy To: PAMNET@listserv.nd.edu

ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:01:00 -0800 From: george@library.caltech.edu Subject: Opportunity to voice your thoughts on the NIH Public Access Policy To: PAMNET@listserv.nd.edu Forwarding from the SPARC Open Access Forum. Although the encouragement to weigh in is originally from PLoS, I support the notion that a

Forwarding from the SPARC Open Access Forum. Although the encouragement to weigh in is originally from PLoS, I support the notion that a diversity of opinions exist on the wisdom of the proposal. Hopefully rational, factual feedback to NIH will result in a considered decision which will address all of the legitimate concerns expressed. George S. Porter Sherman Fairchild Library of Engineering & Applied Science California Institute of Technology Mail Code 1-43, Pasadena, CA 91125-4300 Telephone (626) 395-3409 Fax (626) 431-2681 http://library.caltech.edu contributor http://stlq.info | http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html --------------------------------------- Forwarding from PLoS. I couldn't agree more: the deadline for comments on the NIH plan is November 16. You should definitely consider expressing your support. For more, see my FAQ on the NIH plan, http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/nihfaq.htm Peter [Suber] ----------cut here---------- Dear Colleague, As you may know, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently proposed an "Enhanced Public Access Policy" that will, if adopted, increase the availability of the research findings funded by NIH. The plan would require that all articles resulting from NIH-funded studies be made freely available to the public no later than six months after publication, through the National Library of Medicine's centralized archive of full-text literature, PubMed Central (PMC). Many members of the publishing industry have been critical of the pending move, fearing a negative impact on their subscription revenues if they release even a subset of the articles they publish (those funded by NIH) to PMC. But many others, including quite a few prominent scientists and journal editors, support NIH's prospective action to increase access to important biomedical discoveries. . Your perspective and experience both as a supporter of open access and as a scientist who conducts research and publishes, reviews, edits, and reads articles is critically relevant to NIH as it considers the pros and cons of moving forward with its plan. For that reason, we urge you to submit a comment on the issue using this link: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/public_access/add.htm. At the bottom of this email are some ideas you might incorporate into your statement. Please note that it is important that you indicate your institutional affiliation and position and craft a unique comment - better to be brief and specific than long and wordy. Comments from scientists outside the US are extremely valuable, too. More information about the policy is available at http://www.nih.gov/about/publicaccess/index.htm. Notable statements of support for the plan include: * An open letter to the US Congress signed by 25 Nobel Laureates: http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/bof.html. * The Council of the National Academy of Sciences: http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/s09162004?OpenDocument. * The Alliance for Taxpayer Access (site provides up-to-date information about the policy): http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/ Ideas you might include in your comment: -- Unrestricted dissemination of your articles via PubMed Central can increase the impact and visibility of your work; recent studies have shown that articles that are available without subscriptions or other financial barriers are cited more frequently and appropriately than those that are not (Antelman, K., "Do Open Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact?" College and Research Libraries, Sept. 2004). Due to the rising subscription costs libraries face, many of your colleagues and virtually all members of the public can't access your papers. [From 1998-2003, the average price of an academic journal increased at more than five times the rate of inflation, according to a United Kingdom Parliamentary Committee's findings.] -- The proposed NIH policy will not put you in conflict with journal policies - many publishers already deposit their articles in PMC voluntarily, some, like PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine, immediately upon publication, others with a delay of two to twelve months or more. None have seen any decline in their subscription bases, although some have seen evidence of increased interest in their journals (see http://www.biomedcentral.com/openaccess/archive/?page=features&issue=6) -- The proposed NIH policy accommodates a variety of publishing models and favors none - it simply states that the NIH, as a federal funding agency supported by the taxpayers, is committed to sharing the results of the research it supports with the public. The comment period is open until November 16, 2004. Thanks very much in advance for your support of open access! Helen Doyle, Ph.D. Director of Development and Strategic Alliances Public Library of Science ************************************************** To send an email to PAMnet: pamnet@listserv.nd.edu To view PAMnet Archives: http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/pamnet.html To unsubscribe to PAMnet: http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=pamnet&A;=1 To modify subscription settings: http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=pamnet&A;=1 _______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partneronline. Unrestricted dissemination of your articles via PubMed Central can increase the impact and visibility of your work; recent studies have shown that articles that are available without subscriptions or other financial barriers are cited more frequently and appropriately than those that are not (Antelman, K., "Do Open Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact?" College and Research Libraries, Sept. 2004). Due to the rising subscription costs libraries face, many of your colleagues and virtually all members of the public can't access your papers. [From 1998-2003, the average price of an academic journal increased at more than five times the rate of inflation, according to a United Kingdom Parliamentary Committee's findings.] -- The proposed NIH policy will not put you in conflict with journal policies - many publishers already deposit their articles in PMC voluntarily, some, like PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine, immediately upon publication, others with a delay of two to twelve months or more. None have seen any decline in their subscription bases, although some have seen evidence of increased interest in their journals (see http://www.biomedcentral.com/openaccess/archive/?page=features&issue=6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/openaccess/archive/?page=features&issue=6 ) -- The proposed NIH policy accommodates a variety of publishing models and favors none - it simply states that the NIH, as a federal funding agency supported by the taxpayers, is committed to sharing the results of the research it supports with the public. Smita Chandra wrote: Apologies for cross posting. Note: forwarded message attached. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a diversity of opinions exist on the wisdom of the proposal. Hopefully rational, factual feedback to NIH will result in a considered decision which will address all of the legitimate concerns expressed. George S. Porter Sherman Fairchild Library of Engineering & Applied Science California Institute of Technology Mail Code 1-43, Pasadena, CA 91125-4300 Telephone (626) 395-3409 Fax (626) 431-2681 http://library.caltech.edu contributor http://stlq.info | http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html --------------------------------------- Forwarding from PLoS. I couldn't agree more: the deadline for comments on the NIH plan is November 16. You should definitely consider expressing your support. For more, see my FAQ on the NIH plan, http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/nihfaq.htm Peter [Suber] ----------cut here---------- Dear Colleague, As you may know, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently proposed an "Enhanced Public Access Policy" that will, if adopted, increase the availability of the research findings funded by NIH. The plan would require that all articles resulting from NIH-funded studies be made freely available to the public no later than six months after publication, through the National Library of Medicine's centralized archive of full-text literature, PubMed Central (PMC). Many members of the publishing industry have been critical of the pending move, fearing a negative impact on their subscription revenues if they release even a subset of the articles they publish (those funded by NIH) to PMC. But many others, including quite a few prominent scientists and journal editors, support NIH's prospective action to increase access to important biomedical discoveries. . Your perspective and experience both as a supporter of open access and as a scientist who conducts research and publishes, reviews, edits, and reads articles is critically relevant to NIH as it considers the pros and cons of moving forward with its plan. For that reason, we urge you to submit a comment on the issue using this link: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/public_access/add.htm. At the bottom of this email are some ideas you might incorporate into your statement. Please note that it is important that you indicate your institutional affiliation and position and craft a unique comment - better to be brief and specific than long and wordy. Comments from scientists outside the US are extremely valuable, too. More information about the policy is available at http://www.nih.gov/about/publicaccess/index.htm. Notable statements of support for the plan include: * An open letter to the US Congress signed by 25 Nobel Laureates: http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/bof.html. * The Council of the National Academy of Sciences: http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/s09162004?OpenDocument. * The Alliance for Taxpayer Access (site provides up-to-date information about the policy): http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/ Ideas you might include in your comment: -- Unrestricted dissemination of your articles via PubMed Central can increase the impact and visibility of your work; recent studies have shown that articles that are available without subscriptions or other financial barriers are cited more frequently and appropriately than those that are not (Antelman, K., "Do Open Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact?" College and Research Libraries, Sept. 2004). Due to the rising subscription costs libraries face, many of your colleagues and virtually all members of the public can't access your papers. [From 1998-2003, the average price of an academic journal increased at more than five times the rate of inflation, according to a United Kingdom Parliamentary Committee's findings.] -- The proposed NIH policy will not put you in conflict with journal policies - many publishers already deposit their articles in PMC voluntarily, some, like PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine, immediately upon publication, others with a delay of two to twelve months or more. None have seen any decline in their subscription bases, although some have seen evidence of increased interest in their journals (see http://www.biomedcentral.com/openaccess/archive/?page=features&issue=6) -- The proposed NIH policy accommodates a variety of publishing models and favors none - it simply states that the NIH, as a federal funding agency supported by the taxpayers, is committed to sharing the results of the research it supports with the public. The comment period is open until November 16, 2004. Thanks very much in advance for your support of open access! Helen Doyle, Ph.D. Director of Development and Strategic Alliances Public Library of Science ************************************************** To send an email to PAMnet: pamnet@listserv.nd.edu To view PAMnet Archives: http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/pamnet.html To unsubscribe to PAMnet: http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=pamnet&A;=1 To modify subscription settings: http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=pamnet&A;=1 _______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum http://in.rd.yahoo.com/specials/mailtg/*http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrim... Yahoo! India Matrimony : Find your life partner http://in.rd.yahoo.com/specials/mailtg2/*http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matri... online .