Publishers Offer CHORUS as Solution to Federal Open Access Requirements

The Association of American Publishers (AAP) has put forward its bid for a coalition of publishers to handle many of the requirements outlined in the recent Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memo requiring open access to federally funded research, in the form of the Clearinghouse for the Open Research of the United States (CHORUS). The publishers are in discussions with OSTP, the funding agencies, universities and research library communities (as are other proposed solutions by other stakeholders, not yet announced). CHORUS plans to 'work out the system architecture and technical specifications over the summer and have an initial proof of concept completed by August 30.' Publishers have offered to cover the costs for implementing CHORUS, but Joseph W. Serene, Treasurer/Publisher of the American Physical Society (APS), doesn’t think that will be a heavy burden. He told LJ, 'most of the things that are on [the memo’s list of requirements], we can provide at very little marginal expense.' Metadata nonprofit CrossRef and its newly launched FundRef service, which ties published papers to the grants that fund them, would provide the infrastructure or “back-end”, Ed Pentz, Executive Director of CrossRef, told LJ. Given that the publishers were already planning to include FundRef information and participating in dark archives such as CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and PORTICO, 'making a version of the paper available to the public, that’s almost a software triviality,' Serene said. Similarly, building an integrated interface and APIs are tasks publishers have much experience with.  CHORUS is billed as a substantial savings of time and trouble for agencies, since it would build on publishers’ existing infrastructure. (A major concern of publishers, since as Serene told LJ, 'Money they spend on this they’re not going to be spending on funding research. The APS is very concerned about the money available to fund research; even our commercial partners are concerned because that is ultimately what funds their business.') Other advantages to publishers include minimizing their compliance costs and allowing them to track data about article usage.  Serene also pointed to preventing variant versions, tracking errata, and drawing readers’ eyes to the publishers’ platforms, where they may decide to take advantage of other resources, as motivations for APS’s participation.  As outlined, CHORUS does not yet address the data or text mining portions of the memo ... The short answer is, no one knows yet what CHORUS would mean for libraries if adopted. Rebecca Kennison, director of Columbia University’s Center for Digital Research and Scholarship, told LJ: 'In reply to the comments on the Scholarly Kitchen posting by Kent Anderson, Thane Kerner of Silverchair says that ‘several university and library organizations’ have been consulted by the CHORUS Steering Committee. Those organizations are not listed, so it is hard to know who were included in those initial discussions and what role they played. I think the comments in response to that posting concerning libraries raise interesting questions that remain (at least as of this [Wednesday] evening) unanswered by the CHORUS Steering Committee. It remains unclear what role, if any, CHORUS would see libraries playing in the solution they are proposing' ..."