« RWA/FRPAA -- SPARC misses an opportunity | Main | What value do publishers bring to public access articles? »

February 22, 2012



Would support of FRPAA, whatever its flaws, get us closer to the ultimate goals of interoperability and data-mining? Is it a very modest step or actually a step backward? I say modest step forward, which is why FRPAA should be supported as the larger debates continue.

It reminds me of the health care debate--single payer is the best way to go, but so politically toxic that we have a muddled down law instead. And yet that law is still better than what we have now and will provide insurance to millions who do not have it.. As they say, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

T Scott

You may very well be right. It may be that the incremental approach that FRPAA represents is the best that we can do right now. And yet, when I talk to people in publishing I don’t hear much resistance to Open Access. Marty Frank, at APS, has been the most vocal of the society publishers in his opposition to FRPAA and to the NIH Policy, but he’s been a leader among the Highwire publishers in making content freely available and he’s the one who helped develop and push the linking proposal that I reference in this post. During the discussions that led to the report from the Scholarly Publishing Roundtable, it became clear that the big commercial publishers were quite willing to consider some form of funder-supported gold OA. The big publishers (commercial and not-for-profit), given their significant investments in infrastructure, definitely get the importance of standards for interoperability and the importance of preservation/archiving. So I think the sad irony is that the focus on FRPAA has actually been an impediment. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the folks at OSTP are smart enough to ignore all of the RWA/FRPAA noise.

The comments to this entry are closed.