When Harvard does something, all the others follow. Perhaps this is the tipping point for Open Access as a whole. Peter Suber and Gavin Baker have the best commentary and all the links to other worthy commentary in a series of posts worth studying:
More on the imminent OA mandate at Harvard
Harvard votes yes
Text of the Harvard policy
Roundup of commentary on Harvard OA policy
More on the Harvard OA mandate
Stevan Harnad's proposed revisions to the Harvard policy
Three on the Harvard OA mandate
More comments on the Harvard OA mandate
Also read Revere: Unfettered access to scientific work via open access publication
Perhaps the Millennium Conference at Harvard last fall was the straw that broke the camel's back. A lot of key Harvard people were there, hearing the arguments for and against OA and they, apparently, decided that the arguments For won the day. Also, it is nice to see that this effort was bottom-up, coming from faculty, and not a top-down decree.
Education & Careers
Technology
Comments
I'm absolutely thrilled about this, of course. But I do think that more scientists need to realise that this is not just about posting pdf files of their published papers. Open Access implies a wider commitment to on-line communication, one that few scientists are as yet all that engaged with. (It's a time sink, I know, but...)
Example: a couple of weeks ago I posted a (slightly off-hand) comment on the British Medical Journal's rather good website. No reaction. Then the BMJ reprinted it in its print edition (minus a url reference), and I was deluged with e-mails. Among scientists, paper still rules.
Posted by: Elizabeth Pisani | February 17, 2008 8:12 PM