Today, the English Wikipedia has joined a diverse group of websites in taking action against proposed U.S. legislation known as SOPA (WebCite archive) and PIPA (WebCite archive) that would severely curtail the freedom on the internet in a way that wouldn’t allow Wikipedia and its sister project (many of which have put up banners in solidarity) to operate the way they do now.
Apart from the two articles linked above and a few related or technical pages (including the Recent Changes page; WebCite archive), pages on the English Wikipedia are hidden behind a blackout curtain and not visible in a typical desktop browsing mode, nor can they be edited by Wikipedians themselves (with a few exceptions):
This is how the English Wikipedia looks like today
The English Wikipedia goes dark to protest SOPA and PIPA
I joined the initiative by blacking out my own site, yet I left this project blog online in order to add an Open Access spin to the matter.
Specifically, today’s Open Access File of the Day is a non-editable (yay, PDF) copy of the current version (WebCite archive) of the English Wikipedia’s entry on the Research Work Act, a bill that follows in the footsteps of SOPA, PIPA and similar freedom-curtailing legal activities by proposing a ban on Open Access mandates, as put into perspective on Monday by Mike Taylor in The Guardian.
To take action against RWA, see http://www.thepetitionsite.com/207/support-the-open-access-movement-stop-the-research-works-act/ .
A copy of the HTML version of the article is also pasted in below. Improvements to the article itself can continue tomorrow.
Research Works Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|
| Full title | “To ensure the continued publication and integrity of peer-reviewed research works by the private sector.” —H.R. 3699[1] |
|---|---|
| Citations | |
| Codification | |
| Legislative history | |
|
|
| Major amendments | |
| None | |
| Supreme Court cases | |
| None | |
Contents[hide] |
[edit]Reception
The bill is supported by the Association of American Publishers (AAP)[11] and the Copyright Alliance.[12] In contrast, theScholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition,[3] the Alliance for Taxpayer Access,[13] the American Library Association,[4] the International Society for Computational Biology[14] and prominent open science and open access advocates have criticized the Research Works Act,[15][16][17][18][19] some of them urging scholarly societies to resign from the AAP because of its support for the bill.[20][21] MIT Press, a member of the AAP, have stated their opposition to the bill but signaled no intention to leave the trade union.[22]. Other AAP members have since stated their opposition to the bill as well.[23] Opponents of the bill stressed particularly the effects of this legislation on the public availability of biomedical research results, such as those funded by NIH grants, submitting that under the new bill “taxpayers who already paid for the research would have to pay again to read the results”.[24][edit]Related legislation
The Research Works Act is the latest in a series of attempts to challenge institutional open access mandates in the US. On September 9, 2008, an earlier bill aimed at reversing the NIH’s Public Access Policy – the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act, or Conyers Bill – was introduced as H.R.6845 in the House of Representatives at the 110th United States Congress by U.S Representative John Conyers (D-MI), with Tom Feeney (R-FL), Darrell Issa and Robert Wexler (R-FL) acting as co-sponsors.[25] It was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, to which Conyers delivered an introduction on September 10, 2008.[26] After the start of the 111th United States Congress, Conyers reintroduced the bill to the House of Representatives as H.R.801 on February 3, 2009, co-sponsored by Steve Cohen (D-TN), Chaka Fattah (D-PA), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Darrell Issa, Carolyn Maloney and Robert Wexler.[27] It was on the same day referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and on March 16 to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.[28][edit]See also
[edit]References
- ^ a b Rosen, Rebecca J. (January 5, 2012). “Why Is Open-Internet Champion Darrell Issa Supporting an Attack on Open Science?”. The Atlantic. Archived from the original on January 11, 2012.
- ^ H.R. 3699
- ^ a b Joseph, Heather (January 6, 2012). “Take Action: Oppose H.R. 3699, a new bill to block public access to publicly funded research”. SPARC blog. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ a b Trying to roll back the clock on Open Access statement by the American Library Association that “vehemently opposes the bill”.
- ^ Dobbs, David (January 6, 2012). “Congress Considers Paywalling Science You Already Paid For”. Wired. Archived from the original on January 11, 2012.
- ^ Piwowar, Heather. Research Works Act Attacks Data Dissemination Too
- ^ H.R. 3699: Research Works Act: Committee Assignments
- ^ List of members elected to the standing committees of the House of Representatives on January 5, 2011
- ^ Peter Suber (October 2, 2008). “A bill to overturn the NIH policy”. SPARC Open Access Newsletter. Archived from the original on January 15, 2012. Retrieved January 15, 2012.
- ^ Peter Suber (March 2, 2009). “Re-introduction of the bill to kill the NIH policy”. SPARC Open Access Newsletter. Archived from the original on January 15, 2012. Retrieved January 15, 2012.
- ^ Sporkin, Andi (December 23, 2011). “Publishers Applaud “Research Works Act,” Bipartisan Legislation To End Government Mandates on Private-Sector Scholarly Publishing”. Association of American Publishers. Archived from the original on January 6, 2012.
- ^ Statement from Copyright Alliance Executive Director Sandra Aistars, Re: Introduction of H.R. 3699, the Research Works Act
- ^ Joseph, Heather; McLennan, Jennifer (January 6, 2012). “Call to action: Oppose H.R. 3699, a bill to block public access to publicly funded research”. Alliance for Taxpayer Access. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ Jacobs, Grant (January 11, 2012). “ISCB to respond to Research Works Act (HR 3699)”. Code for Life. Archived from the original on January 15, 2012. Retrieved January 15, 2012.
- ^ Harnad, Stevan (January 7, 2012). “Research Works Act H.R.3699: The Private Publishing Tail Trying To Wag The Public Research Dog, Yet Again”. Open Access Archivangelism. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ Eisen, Michael (January 5, 2012). “Elsevier-funded NY Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney Wants to Deny Americans Access to Taxpayer Funded Research”. Archivedfrom the original on January 11, 2012. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ Murray-Rust, Peter (January 6, 2012). “The Scholarly Poor could lose access to scientific research; this is serious”. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ O’Reilly, Tim (January 5, 2012). “Oppose H.R. 3699: To ensure the continued publication and integrity of peer-reviewed research works by the private sector”. Letters to Congress. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ Peter Suber (January 6, 2012). “New bill to block open access to publicly-funded research”. Archived from the original on January 15, 2012. Retrieved January 15, 2012.
- ^ Eisen, Michael (January 7, 2012). “Our scientific societies need to quit the Association of American Publishers”. Retrieved January 8, 2012.
- ^ Dupuis, John (January 5, 2012). “Scholarly Societies: It’s time to abandon the AAP over The Research Works Act”. Confessions of a Science Librarian.
- ^ Richard Poynder (January 11, 2012). “MIT Press distances itself from Research Works Act”. Open and Shut. Retrieved January 15, 2012.
- ^ “Notes on the Research Works Act”. Retrieved January 17, 2012.
- ^ Eisen, Michael (January 10, 2012). “Research Bought, Then Paid For”. New York Times. Retrieved January 11, 2012.
- ^ “Bill Text 110th Congress (2007–2008) H.R.6845.IH”. The Library of Congress.
- ^ “Speech of John Conyers in the House of Representatives, September 10, 2008″. The Library of Congress.
- ^ “Bill Text 111th Congress (2009–2010) H.R.801.IH”. The Library of Congress.
- ^ “Bill summary and status, H.R.801″. The Library of Congress.
[edit]External links
Daniel Dietrich
Daniel Mietchen
Laura Newman
nilsdagssonmoskopp
Pingback: The nightmare called SOPA scares tech giants | IT Chimes Blog