DigitalKoans

Peter Suber reports that the NIH open access mandate may be deleted or weakened by last-minute amendments to the FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill (see his posting reproduced in full below).

You can easily contact your senators using the ALA Action Alert Web form with my cut-and-paste version of the below ATA text or you can use the same form to write your own text.

Urgent action need to support the NIH bill

The provision to mandate OA at the NIH is in trouble.  Late Friday, just before the filing deadline, a Senator acting on behalf of the publishing lobby filed two harmful amendments, one to delete the provision and one to weaken it significantly.  We thought we'd done everything and only had to wait for the Senate vote.  But now we have to mobilize once more, and fast, to squash these amendments.  Here an announcement from the Alliance for Taxpayer Access:

URGENT CALL TO ACTION: Tell your Senator to OPPOSE amendments that strike or change the NIH public access provision in the FY08 Labor/HHS appropriations bill

The Senate is currently considering the FY08 Labor-HHS Bill, which includes a provision (already approved by the House of Representatives and the full Senate Appropriations Committee), that directs the NIH to change its Public Access Policy so that participation is required (rather than requested) for researchers, and ensures free, timely public access to articles resulting from NIH-funded research. On Friday, Senator Inhofe (R-OK), filed two amendments (#3416 and #3417), which call for the language to either be stricken from the bill, or modified in a way that would gravely limit the policy’s effectiveness.

Amendment #3416 would eliminate the provision altogether. Amendment #3417 is likely to be presented to your Senator as a compromise that “balances” the needs of the public and of publishers. In reality, the current language in the NIH public access provision accomplishes that goal. Passage of either amendment would seriously undermine access to this important public resource, and damage the community’s ability to advance scientific research and discovery.

Please contact your Senators TODAY and urge them to vote “NO” on amendments #3416 and #3417. (Contact must be made before close of business on Monday, October 22). A sample email is provided for your use below. Feel free to personalize it, explaining why public access is important to you and your institution. Contact information and a tool to email your Senator are online [here]. No time to write? Call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 to be patched through to your Senate office.

If you have written in support before, or when you do so today, please inform the Alliance for Taxpayer Access. Contact Jennifer McLennan through jennifer@arl.org or by fax at (202) 872-0884.

Thanks for your continued efforts to support public access at the National Institutes of Health.

—–

SAMPLE EMAIL

Dear Senator:

On behalf of [your organization], I strongly urge you to OPPOSE proposed Amendments #3416 and #3417 to the FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill (S.1710). These amendments would seriously impede public access to taxpayer-funded biomedical research, stifling critical advancements in lifesaving research and scientific discovery. The current bill language was carefully crafted to balance the needs of ALL stakeholders, and to ensure that the American public is able to fully realize our collective investment in science.

To ensure public access to medical research findings, language was included in the in the FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill directing the NIH to make a much-needed improvement to its Public Access Policy — requiring that NIH-funded researchers deposit their manuscripts in the National Library of Medicine’s online database to be made publicly available within one year of publication in a peer-reviewed journal.  This change is supported by NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, and a broad coalition of educational institutions, scientific researchers, healthcare practitioners, publishers, patient groups, libraries, and student groups — representing millions of taxpayers seeking to advance medical research.

Amendment #3416 would eliminate this important provision, leaving only a severely weakened, voluntary NIH policy in place. Under the voluntary policy (in place for more than two years) less than 5% of individual researchers have participated — rendering the policy ineffective. The language in Amendment #3417 would place even further restrictions on the policy, ensuring that taxpayers – including doctors and scientists – are unable to take full advantage of this important public resource.

Supporting the current language in the FY08 LHHS Appropriations Bill is the best way to ensure that taxpayers’ investment in NIH-funded research is used as effectively as possible.  Taxpayer-funded NIH research belongs to the American public. They have paid for it, and it is for their benefit.

I urge you to join the millions of scientists, researchers, libraries, universities, and patient and consumer advocacy groups in supporting the current language in the FY08 LHHS Appropriations bill and require NIH grantees to deposit in PubMed Central final peer-reviewed manuscripts no later than 12 months following publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Vote NO on Amendments #3416 and #3417.

Comment.  The ATA is not exaggerating.  This is urgent.  If you're a US citizen, please contact your Senators and spread the word.  Note the short deadline.  Your Senators must hear from you before the end of business on Monday, October 22:  two days from now.

The RUBRIC Project has released the RUBRIC Toolkit: Institutional Repository Solutions.

Here's an excerpt from RUBRIC Toolkit: About the RUBRIC Project and the Toolkit page:

The RUBRIC Toolkit is a legacy of the RUBRIC Project, reflecting the discussions, investigation, phases, processes, issues and experiences surrounding the implementation of an Institutional Repository (IR). The sections are based on the collaborative experience of the eight Australian and New Zealand Universities involved in the project.

The content for the RUBRIC Toolkit developed organically and collaboratively in the project wiki over an extended period of time. It was then refined and developed. Project members have populated the Toolkit with useful resources and tools that can be used by other Project Managers and Institutions implementing an IR.

The RUBRIC Toolkit was released in October 2007 and will continue to be updated until the end of the RUBRIC Project in December 2007. As such the Toolkit captures the "best" of available advice, experience and outcomes available for IR development in 2007 and provides links to further reading wherever possible.

Public.resource.org now offers copyright registration records from the United States Copyright Office's Catalog of Registrations via two RSS feeds.

Major Internet and media companies, including CBS, Dailymotion, Fox, Microsoft, NBC Universal, Viacom, and Walt Disney, have agreed to abide by a new set of principles (User Generated Content Principles) for detecting and regulating the use of third-party copyrighted materials in user-generated content.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The principles, which are attached and available in full at www.ugcprinciples.com, call for a broad range of constructive and cooperative efforts by copyright owners and UGC services. They include:

• Implementation of state of the art filtering technology with the goal to eliminate infringing content on UGC services, including blocking infringing uploads before they are made available to the public;
• Upgrading technology when commercially reasonable;
• Cooperating to ensure that the technology is implemented in a manner that effectively balances legitimate interests, including fair use;
• Cooperation in developing procedures for promptly addressing claims that content was blocked in error;
• Regularly using the technology to remove infringing content that was uploaded before the technology could block it;
• Identification and removal of links to sites that are clearly dedicated to, and predominantly used for, the dissemination of infringing content; and,
• Promotion of content-rich, infringement-free services by continuing to cooperatively test new technologies and by collaboratively updating these principles as appropriate to keep current with evolving developments.

You can read more about this at "Consortium's User-generated Content Principles Extend Far beyond Fair Use" and "Studios Unveil Their Copyright Protection Guidelines," and "Unprincipled 'Principles' for User Generated Content."

The Wall Street Journal has run an article about the growing problem of Houston's lack of zoning ("Houston's Twilight Zone: Projects Rise in Odd Spots").

What got the newspaper's and the Mayor's attention is a plan to build a 23-story condominium in a high-end neighborhood not far from Rice University. Understandably, the influential residents of this area are not thrilled by the prospect of an enormous tower looming over their increasingly pricey homes.

Real estate values in the "Inner Loop" (an inner city area bounded by the 610 highway) have skyrocketed in the last 15 years, and property taxes have followed the sharp upward curve. Desirable older neighborhoods with single-story houses built in the 1950s and 1960s have been ravaged by developers, who have torn down these houses to build large multiple-story mansions in the $800,000 to well over $1 million range. Builders have been undeterred as the prices of these single-story houses have doubled (or more) to roughly the $300,000-$400,000 range. Poor neighborhoods close to downtown have been decimated as builders have erected one high-end condo or apartment complex after another. This trend has increasing driven those looking for affordable housing outside the Loop, the further the cheaper (good values can be found there, and they keep Houston's overall housing costs fairly low). But Houston is a big sprawling city (about 600 square miles), and those fleeing inner city face long commutes on packed highways that are under perpetual construction in a futile attempt to keep up with the demand for new lanes.

Zoning issues are not new in Houston, but what is new is the trend for developers to want to erect large, expensive condominium complexes in the midst of high-end neighborhoods (the project mentioned in the article is not the only one in the works), and that's got the natives riled in those neighborhoods.

The Free Flow of Information Act of 2007 has passed the House, shielding most journalists and some bloggers who do not want to reveal confidential background story information during federal investigations. At the last minute, the bill was amended so that bloggers and reporters must derive "a substantial portion of the person's livelihood or for substantial financial gain" from their work.

Read more about it at "House Passes Federal Journalist Shield, Includes Bloggers" and "U.S. House Overwhelmingly Passes Federal Shield Bill, Changes Definition of Who Is Covered."

Public Domain Works has announced that it will partner with the Open Library, sharing its data about works that are in public domain. Public Domain Works supports the Public Domain Works DB, which is now in beta form.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The plan looks to be to upload the Public Domain Works data to the Open Library, and to use read/write APIs to continue to develop different front-ends for different jurisdictions—each with its own algorithms to determine which works are in the public domain.

PLoS Biology turned four on October 13th. Read more about it "Oops We Missed Our Own Birthday."

OEDb has published an annotated list of over 250 digital libraries and archives with brief annotations and links.