Since The Open Access Bill Probably Won’t Get Passed | Pasco Phronesis

"Signifying that the executive branch review of open access policies is rapidly approaching a middle, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released a memo for agency and department heads on 'Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research.'  This is the biggest step in a process that dates back at least three years, when the Obama Administration put forth a public comment period on the matter.  This was followed by two requests for comment and an open access report.  The petition submitted to We the People, which passed the response threshold (then set at 25,000 signatures) in early June, finally got its response yesterday – not quite nine months later. For a Friday afternoon release, the action has gotten more attention that one might expect, with Washington Post articles up hours prior to today’s paper hitting the streets. Jack Andraka, the 2012 Intel Science Fair first place winner quoted in the piece, was part of the Administration’s State of STEM presentation last week, and will likely be part of the open access conversation moving forward. Independent researchers like Andraka will benefit from the proposed policies, which reflect the open access legislation that has rattled around Congress since at least 2007.  The memo focuses on agencies and departments with annual research and development budgets in excess of $100 million.  The results of research (and the associated metadata) funded with federal dollars must be made available free of charge within twelve months of publication.  This is consistent with the current timeframe for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy, but a longer period than what is proposed in the current open access legislation (six months).  The memo notes that agencies and stakeholders may adjust the twelve month embargo to better fit the needs of the relevant research fields.  Classified research is exempted from this policy. While many open access advocates are happy to see executive branch action, some are disappointed.  Or perhaps they are simply frustrated.  From The Washington Post: 'It’s lame,' said Michael Eisen, a University of California, Berkeley, biologist and a vocal proponent of immediate free access to research papers.'“It’s a major sellout to publishers.' In the same Washington Post article, it was reported that the American Association of Publishers considers the plan in this memo fair, while it is opposed to this year’s open access bills.  (It also supported the anti-open access bills that have floated around Congress in prior years.) ..."