[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

(Fwd) Update on Public Library of Science Initiative

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen,
darf ich hier noch einmal fuer die
- Initiative Werbung machen?!
Das Anliegen in Kuerze:
We believe, however, that the permanent, archival record of 
scientific research and ideas  should neither be owned nor 
controlled by publishers, but should belong to the public, and should 
be freely available through an international online public library. 
It is now clear, however, that if we really want to change the
publication of scientific research, we must do the publishing
Erstaunlich ist, dass man bei uns diesen Ideen kaum nachgeht und 
lieber zusammen mit den Verlegern bei der Politik um mehr Mittel 
bettelt (B'dienst 2001, S. 1352f).
Wer? Bibliothekare! 
Die Wissenschaftler sehen das anders! Wenn wir Bibliothekare uns 
mit den Verlegern gegen die Wissenschaftler stellen, haben wir jede 
Existenzberechtigung verloren!
Schlimm auch, dass die IFLA sich so voellig von Unternehmerseite 
einnehmen laesst (ibid., 1387) - weshalb auch keine kritischen 
Stimmen und Themen bei den Generalkonferenzen hierzu 
zugelassen werden.
Natuerlich sind nicht die engagierten wissenschaftlichen oder 
lieterarischen Klein-Verleger gemeint, sondern Grosskonzerne, die 
das Wissen der Welt monopolisieren wollen.
Mit schoenen Gruessen
-- kalt, aber sonnig! -
Thomas Hilberer

------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht / Forwarded message -------
Datum:   	Fri, 31 Aug 2001 03:05:09 -0700
Von:            	Public Library of Science Initiative <feedback _at__ publiclibraryofscience.org>
An:             	THOMAS HILBERER <TH _at__ HILBERER.DE>
Antwort an:     	<feedback _at__ publiclibraryofscience.org>
Betreff:        	Update on Public Library of Science Initiative

Dear Colleague,

We are writing to update you on the status of the Public Library of
Science initiative, and to offer our perspective on what it has
accomplished and what we can do now to continue to work toward 
and unrestricted access to the published record of scientific
research. More importantly, we ask for your participation and 
in a major new effort - the launching of new scientific journals that
will publish peer-reviewed scientific research reports online with no
restrictions on access or distribution.

We are very grateful for the courageous step you took in signing the
Public Library of Science open letter.  In the 10 months since this
letter began circulating, more than 26,000 of our colleagues from 
countries have signed it, expressing their strong commitment to free
and unrestricted access to the published record of scientific
research.  Your strong voice has brought the issues of access to and
ownership of the scientific literature to the attention of scientists
and the public, and has catalyzed serious thought, discussion, and
debate.  The response from the international scientific community and
the public has been overwhelmingly positive.  It is clear, however,
that scientists' response to this initiative has been more
enthusiastic than the publishing establishment's.  Our initiative has
prompted significant and welcome steps by many scientific publishers
towards freer access to published research, but in general these steps
have fallen short of the reasonable policies we proposed.

We have all pledged that, beginning in September 2001, we will
exclusively support  journals that have agreed to provide their
archival contents, within 6 months of publication, to online public
libraries of science.  We had hoped that many of the journals that we
have long supported and admired would respond constructively. Indeed,
several leading journals have done so - agreeing to make their
published research reports freely available at the NIH's public
archive, PubMed Central, within six months of publication. These
include the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Molecular
Biology of the Cell, the British Medical Journal, Bioinformatics,
Genome Biology, the Canadian Medical Association Journal, the Journal
of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA), and diverse
new online journals published by BioMedCentral (a complete, updated
list of such journals will be posted at

With September upon us, we must all now decide how to proceed. We
believe the best way to advance our shared goals is to make every
effort to publish our work in, and give our full support to, journals
that have adopted the policy proposed in the open letter. By directing
our manuscripts and our voluntary assistance (reviewing and editing)
to these journals, we will reaffirm our belief that no single entity,
whether a publisher or government, should have monopoly control over
any portion of the scientific literature; and we will keep our promise
of support to the journals whose actions endorse this principle.  In
doing so, we can support not only the journals who have earned our
loyalty, but also the 26,000 colleagues who share our commitment.

We recognize that the range of journals that have met our conditions
is not yet sufficient to accommodate all the work that we and our
colleagues must publish. Despite our best intentions, it may not
always be feasible to publish our work in a journal whose publication
practices meet our highest standards.  In such cases, we suggest that
we make every effort to publish in the available option that comes
closest to meeting our goal of unrestricted free distribution within 6
months.  Several journals, including Nucleic Acids Research, Genetics,
American Journal of Human Genetics, the research journals published by
the American Society for Microbiology, several journals published by
the Cold Spring Harbor Press, EMBO Journal and others have taken a
significant, partial step by allowing full-text searching at
PubMedCentral, but still requiring that the articles be accessible
only at their own sites.  And a growing number of journals now allow
free access to back issues, after various intervals, but only at the
publisher's website and without full-text searching at a public site
(see, for example, http://www.highwire.org/lists/freeart.dtl). The
journals that have taken these positive steps are clearly more
deserving of our support than those that have made no constructive
efforts at all. 

It is important for us to continue talking with the publishers of
journals that are important to us, but which have not yet adopted the
policies we support.  This would be an ideal time to write or speak to
the editors of two or three of your favorite journals, and we urge you
to do so.  Let them know where you stand, and that your continuing
support is dependent upon their response to this initiative.

If we follow this course and demonstrate our commitment to free and
unrestricted access to scientific literature, more journals are likely
to adopt the policies we advocate.  However, the resistance this
initiative has met from most of the scientific publishers has made it
clear that if we really want to change the publication of scientific
research, we must do the publishing ourselves. It is now time for us
to work together to create the journals we have called for. We believe
that it is now both necessary and financially feasible for scientists
to create a mechanism for publishing their work - with responsible,
efficient peer review and the highest editorial standards - while
allowing free and unrestricted online distribution from the moment of
publication.  We intend to establish a non-profit scientific publisher
under the banner of the Public Library of Science, operated by
scientists, for the benefit of science and the public. We are
beginning to assemble an editorial board of outstanding scientists
from around the world who share this vision.  We are already raising
the necessary funds to cover the startup and initial operating costs. 
With your participation, vision and energy we can establish a new
model for scientific publishing.  Please join us in this effort. A
complete description of our plans for PLoS journals, and information
on how you can participate in making them a reality, is available at
our website: http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org.


Michael Ashburner, University of Cambridge 
Patrick O. Brown, Stanford University 
Michael B. Eisen, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and UC Berkeley Marc
Kirschner, Harvard University Chaitan Khosla, Stanford University Roel
Nusse, Stanford University Richard J. Roberts, New England Biolabs
Matthew Scott, Stanford University Harold Varmus, Memorial
Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Barbara Wold, Caltech 


Resources available at www.publiclibraryofscience.org

An updated list of journal policies 
Description of plans for Public Library of Science journals 
Links to articles and discussions about PLoS initiative 
A universal PLoS copyright and license agreement

--- Ende der weitergeleiteten Nachricht / End of forwarded message ---
Dr. Thomas Hilberer, Fakultaetsbibliothek Neuphilologie
Tel.: +49 07071  29-74325; FAX: 29-5811
Wilhelmstr. 50, 72074 Tuebingen

Listeninformationen unter http://www.inetbib.de.