Difference between revisions of "NIH policy"

From Peter Suber
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 16: Line 16:
 
* [https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4552029 Congress approves the NIH plan], SPARC Open Access Newsletter, December 2, 2004.
 
* [https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4552029 Congress approves the NIH plan], SPARC Open Access Newsletter, December 2, 2004.
  
* [https://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/nihfaq.htm NIH Public-Access Policy FAQ]. I launched this in early 2005 and stopped updating it in April 2006.
+
* [http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/nihfaq.htm NIH Public-Access Policy FAQ]. I launched this in early 2005 and stopped updating it in April 2006.
  
 
* [https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4724187 Comments on the weakening of the NIH public-access policy], SPARC Open Access Newsletter, February 2, 2005.
 
* [https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4724187 Comments on the weakening of the NIH public-access policy], SPARC Open Access Newsletter, February 2, 2005.

Latest revision as of 16:46, 6 May 2022

Here are my larger pieces of news and comment specifically on the adoption of the NIH policy. Chronological order. —Peter Suber.

  • Public Access to Federally Funded Research: Copyright and Other Issues. A 68-minute video discussion of federal open-access policy between me and Mark Seeley, Senior Vice President and General Counsel at Elsevier. Held at Harvard Law School, sponsored by the American Bar Association Committee on University Intellectual Property Law, and recorded April 9, 2012. Also see my blog post (June 1, 2012) on this event for some follow-up discussion.



Also see my writings on OA more generally, and my other work on the history of OA.