Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday February 26 2019, @04:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the dogs-and-cats-living-together dept.

Phys.org:

What happens to research that is funded by taxpayers? A lot ends up in subscription-only journals, protected from the eyes of most by a paywall.

But a new initiative known as Plan S could change that. Plan S focuses on making all publicly funded research immediately fully and freely available by open access publication.

It sounds like a good idea – but there are possible downsides. This model could potentially undermine peer review, the process vital for ensuring the rigour and quality of published research. It could also increase costs of publication for researchers and funding bodies. So let's do Plan S right.

Taxpayers will have the right to see the research they paid for?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 26 2019, @05:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 26 2019, @05:11PM (#807055)

    "This model could potentially undermine peer review, the process vital for ensuring the rigour and quality of published research. It could also increase costs of publication for researchers and funding bodies."

    There are no drawbacks to the public interest. The drawbacks are strictly to the publishers who have been stealing from taxpayers all this time. Their taxpayer theft is going to come to an end. and now they want to cry about it. Cry me a river.

    It's amazing how those that support IP are the same ones that are in favor of outright theft. They steal from taxpayers yet they support IP with the pretext that it protects authors and creators from 'intellectual theft'. They neglect that the purpose of IP should never be to protect against theft because infringement isn't theft and no one has a moral entitlement to patents or copyright. The purpose should only be to serve the public interest. When this is pointed out to them they then claim that IP is in the public interest and they even go so far as to say that publishers stealing from taxpayers is in the public interest. They claim that it's for the poor poor authors and creators and musicians yet it's always been big corporate conglomerates responsible for pushing these laws.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1