Live data from Hacker News

The Dangerous "Research Works Act"

techcrunch.com

31–33 of 33 posts

Re: The Dangerous "Research Works Act"

#31
post #12
post #2

I think the author is not looking deep enough. Universities form and fund consortiums all the time for one reason or another. The US Government funds even more and has more resources. If either the universities, or the US government, wanted academic research to be public by default, they could bypass the publishers entirely and do so with comparatively little effort. In this case the "publishers" are merely the fall…

So your argument is "there must be some deep conspiracy which I cannot explain yet I will suggest with ominous tones, so let's do nothing." Classic muddying the waters.

"Conspiracy"? I don't recall saying that. But if we take the literal definition of the root word (conspire) then every legislative act would fall into that far too broad category.

Conspiracy theory aside, you have to realize that no law ever gets passed, or even makes it to a full vote, unless multiple parties are successfully convinced that they, their constituents, and their campaign contributors will benefit from the proposed bill.

No muddying of the waters intended. And you're right, I don't know exactly what the real motivations behind this are - however I am sure that there is more than simply the profit margins of publishers at stake here.

Re: The Dangerous "Research Works Act"

#32
post #10
post #2

I think the author is not looking deep enough. Universities form and fund consortiums all the time for one reason or another. The US Government funds even more and has more resources. If either the universities, or the US government, wanted academic research to be public by default, they could bypass the publishers entirely and do so with comparatively little effort. In this case the "publishers" are merely the fall…

1 -- I don't see what you're trying to imply, could you come out and say it? 2 -- Actually, the publishers do have a lot of power. The universities are stuck in a bad equilibrium (in the game theory sense) -- if any of them individually deviates (by not subscribing to popular/restrictive journals and not publishing in them), that university is going to be the one to get hurt. The only way out for universities is if t…

Response to #1: I don't know any more about it than you do, with any degree of certitude. But I do know there's more at stake than protecting publishers.

Response to #2: Good points. But don't forget that the government has the "Power of the Purse". If they tie funding to open access to papers, then some amazing things will start to happen.

Re: The Dangerous "Research Works Act"

#33
post #20
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was it effective?

Apparently it brought NPG back to the negotiating table: http://blogs.nature.com/news/2010/08/nature_and_california_m... Unclear on the details, but presumably UC got a somewhat better price. (Note that UC was getting a better price than most libraries to begin with.)

I've seen no article indicating anything actually came out of this. Ongoing? Fizzled out? CA backed off?
Post reply on HN