Legislation and Government Regulation – Page 17

The Future of Taxpayer-Funded Research: Who Will Control Access to the Results?

The Committee for Economic Development has released The Future of Taxpayer-Funded Research: Who Will Control Access to the Results?.

Here's an excerpt:

This report builds upon that earlier work and delves deeper into the relationship between the traditional means of providing access to federally funded scientific research and the benefits that can be derived from providing greater public access to it. As with virtually any public policy, the benefits and costs of providing public access to federally funded research fall unevenly on different members of society. We find, however, that because public-access policies that make research more open result in accelerated progress in science and faster economic growth, the net societal benefits far outweigh their limited costs.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Call to Action: Support the Federal Research Public Access Act (H.R. 4004 and S. 2096)

The Alliance for Taxpayer Access, whose numerous members include the American Library Association and the Association of College & Research Libraries, has issued a call to action for support of the Federal Research Public Access Act (H.R. 4004 and S. 2096).

Here's an excerpt:

Today (February 9, 2012), Senators Cornyn (R-TX), Wyden (D-OR), and Hutchison (R-TX) and Representatives Doyle (D-PA), Yoder (R-KS), and Clay (D-MO) introduced the Federal Research Public Access Act, a bill that would ensure free, timely, online access to the published results of research funded by eleven U.S. federal agencies.

We currently have a unique opportunity to create change. The Research Works Act, a piece of legislation introduced in December that would ban the government from providing the public access to publicly funded research, has galvanized the research community into acting against practices that restrict access to research articles—reaching the pages of the Economist, the New York Times, Wired, the Guardian, the Chronicle of Higher Education, and many other outlets. . . .

Let Congress know you support FRPAA

With reinvigorated support from the research community and attention from the mainstream media, now is the time to push for this groundbreaking legislation and let Congress know that students—and the rest of the public—deserve access to the research which they paid for and upon which their education depends. . . .

Ask your representatives in Congress to Co-sponsor FRPAA now through the ATA Legislative Action Center. . . .

Thank FRPAA's introducing co-sponsors

Express your organization's support to Congress for public access to taxpayer-funded research and for this bill. Send a copy of your letter to spare [at] arl [dot] org.

Issue a public statement of support from your organization and share it widely with members, colleagues, and the media. Send a copy to spare [at] arl [dot] org to be featured on the FRPAA's Web site. . . .

Raise awareness of and build support for FRPAA

Sign the ATA Petition in support of FRPAA. Click here to view signatories of the petition. . . .

Tweet at or post of the Facebook wall of your legislators to ask them to support and co-sponsor FRPAA; or, if they're already a sponsor, thank them for their leadership. . . .

Background. . . .

Now before both the House of Representatives and the Senate, FRPAA would require those agencies with annual extramural research budgets of $100 million or more to provide the public with online access to research manuscripts stemming from such funding no later than six months after publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The bill gives individual agencies flexibility in choosing the location of the digital repository to house this content, as long as the repositories meet conditions for interoperability and public accessibility, and have provisions for long-term archiving.

The bill specifically covers unclassified research funded by agencies including: Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Science Foundation.

Further information: "SPARC FAQ for University Administrators and Faculty FRPAA 2012" and "Support FRPAA Banners."

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Open Access: Federal Research Public Access Act of 2012

Representative Mike Doyle (D-PA) and others have introduced the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2012 in the House. The bill has also been introduced in the Senate.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Federal Research Public Access Act would require federal agencies with an extramural research budget of $100 million or more to make federally-funded research available for free online access by the general public, no later than six months after publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

The Federal Research Public Access Act would:

Require federal departments and agencies with an annual extramural research budget of $100 million or more, whether funded totally or partially by a government department or agency, to submit an electronic copy of the final manuscript that has been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Ensure that the manuscript is preserved in a stable digital repository maintained by that agency or in another suitable repository that permits free public access, interoperability, and long-term preservation.

Require that each taxpayer-funded manuscript be made available to the public online and without cost, no later than six months after the article has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

"The Influence of the National Institutes of Health Public-Access Policy on the Publishing Habits of Principal Investigators"

Nancy Pontika has released her doctoral dissertation, "The Influence of the National Institutes of Health Public-Access Policy on the Publishing Habits of Principal Investigators."

Here's an excerpt:

The NIH public-access policy did not cause either an increase in the PIs' open-access awareness or a change in their publishing habits. The open-access advocates were supporters of the immediate free access to scientific information before the policy and provided their manuscripts free-of-cost before the policy’s mandate. The non-open-access advocates choose their publications based on quality criteria such as the journal’s prestige, impact factor, speed of publication and the attracted audience, while the article’s open-access availability is considered to be a plus. Furthermore, since a large number of journals comply with the NIH-policy, the participants did not have to change their publishing habits.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Open Access: White House OSTP Releases Public Comments to the RFI on Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting from Federally Funded Research

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has released public comments to the "Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting from Federally Funded Research."

Here is a selection of comments:

Publishers

Scholarly Professional Associations

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Open Access: We the People Petition to Oppose the Research Works Act

A petition for the Obama administration to oppose the Research Works Act (H.R. 3699) is up at the White House's We the People website.

Here's an excerpt:

HR 3699, the Research Works Act will be detrimental to the free flow of scientific information that was created using Federal funds. It is an attempt to put federally funded scientific information behind pay-walls, and confer the ownership of the information to a private entity. This is an affront to open government and open access to information created using public funds.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Ten Library, Publishing, and Advocacy Organizations Oppose the Research Works Act in Letter

Ten library, publishing, and advocacy organizations have opposed the Research Works Act in a letter sent to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Here's an excerpt:

We fully respect copyright law and the protection it affords content creators, owners, and users. The NIH Public Access Policy operates fully within current U.S. Copyright law as articles reporting on NIH funded research are copyrightable, and the copyright belongs to the author. The NIH Policy requires only the grant of a non-exclusive license to NIH, fully consistent with federal policies such as Circular A-110 and Circular A-102. The author is free to transfer some or all of the exclusive rights under copyright to a journal publisher or to assign these anywhere they so choose—a freedom crucial to the authors of scientific articles, who rightly want to determine where and how their work is distributed.

Under H.R. 3699, authors of articles reporting on federally funded research would face a new restriction. The proposed bill requires authors to seek the permission of a publisher before their work can be distributed through an online, networked government channel such as NIH’s PubMed Central, even if they themselves—as the author of the work and the relevant rights holder—have already consented to do so, potentially limiting the authors ability to distribute their work as widely as they may wish.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Research Works Act (H.R. 3699) Threatens Open Access to Publicly Funded Research

Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) have introduced the Research Works Act (H.R. 3699), which is aimed at eliminating federal open access policies such as the NIH Public Access Policy. The key passage of the bill states:

No Federal agency may adopt, implement, maintain, continue, or otherwise engage in any policy, program, or other activity that—

causes, permits, or authorizes network dissemination of any private-sector research work without the prior consent of the publisher of such work; or

requires that any actual or prospective author, or the employer of such an actual or prospective author, assent to network dissemination of a private-sector research work.

The Alliance for Taxpayer Access has issued a call to action and a draft letter that can be modified and sent to legislators. Here's an excerpt from the call:

Supporters of public access need to speak out against this proposed legislation. We strongly urge you to contact these offices to express your opposition TODAY, or as soon as possible. To support you, draft letter text is available.

Representative Issa
@DarrellIssa
http://issa.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=597&Itemid=73
Fax: (202) 225-3303

Representative Maloney
@RepMaloney
https://maloney.house.gov/contact-me/email-me%20(Using%20zip%20code%2010128-3679) [Navigate from home page to contact page instead.]
Fax: (202) 225-4709

Members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee – especially if you’re a constituent.
http://1.usa.gov/zDqnne

Your representative – through the ATA Action Center: http://www.congressweb.com/cweb2/index.cfm/siteid/sparc

Also, don’t miss a key opportunity to express support for the expansion of the NIH public-access policy to other federal science and technology agencies. There are six days left to respond to the White House requests for information (RFI) on public access to scholarly publications and data (http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/action/action_access/11-1117.shtml).

[Regular DigitalKoans posts resume on 1/17/12.]

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

SOPA/PIPA Alternative: "Fighting the Unauthorized Trade of Digital Goods while Protecting Internet Security, Commerce and Speech"

Senator Ron Wyden and others have released a draft proposal, "Fighting the Unauthorized Trade of Digital Goods while Protecting Internet Security, Commerce and Speech," that presents an alternative to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (PIPA).

Here's an excerpt:

We found that using trade laws to address the flow of infringing digital goods into the United States makes it possible to avoid many of the pitfalls that would arise from other legislative proposals currently being advanced to combat online infringement. Namely by putting the regulatory power in the hands of the International Trade Commission—versus a diversity of magistrate judges not versed in Internet and trade policy—will ensure a transparent process in which import policy is fairly and consistently applied and all interests are taken into account. When infringement is addressed only from a narrow judicial perspective, important issues pertaining to cybersecurity and the promotion of online innovation, commerce and speech get neglected. By approaching digital good infringement as a matter of regulating international commerce, we are able to take all of these factors into account.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital Bibliographies | Digital Scholarship |

FCC Net Neutrality Rules Upheld in Senate

The Disapproving the Rule Submitted by the Federal Communications Commission with Respect to Regulating the Internet and Broadband Industry Practices resolution was defeated in the Senate.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

Library Copyright Alliance Sends Letter to House Committee on the Judiciary about Stop Online Piracy Act

The Library Copyright Alliance has sent a letter to Chairman Lamar Smith and Ranking Member John Conyers of the House Committee on the Judiciary about the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Here's an excerpt:

There are three pending copyright infringement lawsuits against universities and their libraries relating to their use of digital technology One of these cases, AIME v. UCLA, concerns the streaming of films to students as part of their course assignments. These lawsuits reflect a growing tension between rights holders and libraries, and some rights holders' increasingly belligerent enforcement mentality. Moreover, legislation such as SOPA and the PRO-IP Act passed in the 110th Congress, and the activities of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (a position created by the PRO-IP Act), encourage federal prosecutors to enforce copyrights law more aggressively.

In this environment, the criminal prosecution of a library for copyright infringement is no longer beyond the realm of possibility. For this reason, we strongly oppose the amendments described above, which would increase the exposure of libraries to prosecution. The broadening of the definition of willful infringement could result in a criminal prosecution if an Assistant U.S. Attorney believes that a library's assertion of fair use or one of the Copyright Act's other privileges is unreasonable. This risk is compounded with streaming, which SOPA would subject to felony penalties even if conducted without purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain.

| New: Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography, Version 80 | Digital Scholarship |

ALA Issues Action Alert: "Ask Your Senators to Vote ‘NO’ on Overturning Net Neutrality Order"

ALA has issued an action alert: "Ask Your Senators to Vote 'NO' on Overturning Net Neutrality Order."

Here's an excerpt:

This week (Nov. 7-11), the full U.S. Senate will vote on Senate Joint Resolution 6, a bill to overturn the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) order passed to adopt "net neutrality."

Please call your Senators and ask them to vote "NO" on S.J. Res. 6. Your call sends a loud and clear message that libraries depend on an open and nondiscriminatory Internet to provide our patrons, the public, unfettered access to information.

Additional talking points:

Voting no helps preserve the openness of the Internet which is essential to our nation's educational achievement, freedom of speech and economic growth.

Without an open and neutral Internet, there is great risk that commercial Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will give higher priority to some users (e.g. give entertainment priority over education).

ISPs may seek to impose additional fees on Internet users which could drastically impact libraries who require much greater bandwidth than households to serve their patrons, many at one time.

Read more about it at "Network (Net) Neutrality Legislative Activity."

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Weblog | Digital Scholarship |

Digital Scholarship |

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Issues RFIs on Public Access to Federally Funded Scholarly Publications and Digital Data

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has issued a "Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting from Federally Funded Research" and "Request for Information: Public Access to Digital Data Resulting from Federally Funded Scientific Research."

Here's an excerpt from the scholarly publications RFI:

In accordance with Section 103(b)(6) of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (ACRA; Pub. L. 111-358), this Request for Information (RFI) offers the opportunity for interested individuals and organizations to provide recommendations on approaches for ensuring long-term stewardship and broad public access to the peer-reviewed scholarly publications that result from federally funded scientific research. The public input provided through this Notice will inform deliberations of the National Science and Technology Council's Task Force on Public Access to Scholarly Publications.

Here's an excerpt from the digital data RFI:

In accordance with Section 103(b)(6) of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (ACRA; Pub. L. 111-358), this Request for Information (RFI) offers the opportunity for interested individuals and organizations to provide recommendations on approaches for ensuring long-term stewardship and encouraging broad public access to unclassified digital data that result from federally funded scientific research. The public input provided through this Notice will inform deliberations of the National Science and Technology Council's Interagency Working Group on Digital Data.

| Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals | Digital Scholarship |

Digital Scholarship |

Stop Online Piracy Act Introduced in House of Representatives

Representative Lamar Smith and others have introduced the H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

A bipartisan group in the House today introduced legislation that expands protections for America's intellectual property (IP) and combats the illegal distribution of counterfeit goods via rogue websites. The Stop Online Piracy Act (H.R. 3261) allows the Attorney General to seek injunctions against foreign websites that steal and sell American innovations and products. The bill increases criminal penalties for individuals who traffic in counterfeit medicine and military goods, which put innocent civilians and American soldiers at risk. And it improves coordination between IP enforcement agencies in the U.S.

Gigi B. Sohn, president and co-founder of Public Knowledge issued a statement about the bill. Here's an excerpt:

The new House legislation (HR 3261) is an unwarranted expansion of government power to protect one special interest. The bill would overturn the long-accepted principles and practices of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice and takedown process in favor of a one-sided enforcement mechanism that is far more broad than existing law while not attempting to protect the rights of anyone accused of copyright infringement.

In addition, anyone who writes about, or links to, a site suspected of infringement could also become a target of government action. The bill also features the now well-known dangers to the engineering of the Internet domain-name system (DNS), endangering Internet security while requiring Internet Service Providers and search engines to take on vast new responsibilities to block access to suspected sites.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

S.978 Would Make Unauthorized Streaming a Felony with 5 Year Maximum Sentence

Senator Amy Klobuchar and two cosponsors have introduced S.978, which would make unauthorized streaming of copyrighted works a felony.

Here's an excerpt:

‘(2) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if–

‘(A) the offense consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works; and

‘(B)(i) the total retail value of the performances, or the total economic value of such public performances to the infringer or to the copyright owner, would exceed $2,500; or

‘(ii) the total fair market value of licenses to offer performances of those works would exceed $5,000;’

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

New Spanish Law on Science, Technology and Innovation Includes Open Access Policy

The Spanish Congreso de los Diputados has passed the Law on Science, Technology and Innovation, which includes an open access policy.

Here's an excerpt from the bill:

Artículo 37. Difusión en acceso abierto.

Los agentes públicos del Sistema Español de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación impulsarán el desarrollo de repositorios, propios o compartidos, de acceso abierto a las publicaciones de su personal de investigación, y establecerán sistemas que permitan conectarlos con iniciativas similares de ámbito nacional e internacional.

El personal de investigación cuya actividad investigadora esté financiada mayoritariamente con fondos de los Presupuestos Generales del Estado hará pública una versión digital de la versión final de los contenidos que le hayan sido aceptados para publicación en publicaciones de investigación seriadas o periódicas, tan pronto como resulte posible, pero no más tarde de doce meses después de la fecha oficial de publicación.

La versión electrónica se hará pública en repositorios de acceso abierto reconocidos en el campo de conocimiento en el que se ha desarrollado la investigación, o en repositorios institucionales de acceso abierto.

La versión electrónica pública podrá ser empleada por las Administraciones Públicas en sus procesos de evaluación.

El Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación facilitará el acceso centralizado a los repositorios, y su conexión con iniciativas similares nacionales e internacionales.

Lo anterior se entiende sin perjuicio de los acuerdos en virtud de los cuales se hayan podido atribuir o transferir a terceros los derechos sobre las publicaciones, y no será de aplicación cuando los derechos sobre los resultados de la actividad de investigación, desarrollo e innovación sean susceptibles de protección.

Here's the Google Translate version:

Article 37. Open access dissemination.

The public agents of the Spanish Science, Technology and Innovation will drive the development repositories, own or shared access open to the publications of its research staff, and establish systems to connect with similar initiatives at national and international.

The research staff whose activity research is financed mainly with funds from the State Budget will released a digital version of the final version of contents which have been accepted for publication serial research publications or periodicals, as soon as practicable, but no more later than twelve months after the official date publication.

The electronic version will be published in repositories open access recognized in the field knowledge which has developed research or open access institutional repositories.

The public electronic version can be used by the government in its processes evaluation.

The Ministry of Science and Innovation will facilitate centralized access to repositories, and their connection with similar national and international initiatives.

This is without prejudice to agreements under which they have attributed or transferred to third parties rights publications and do not apply when the rights to results of research activities, development and eligible for protection innovation.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

PROTECT IP Act Introduced in Senate

Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) have introduced the PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act) in the Senate.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act, or PROTECT IP Act, follows bipartisan legislation introduced in 2010, which won the unanimous support of Senate Judiciary Committee members. The PROTECT IP Act narrows the definition of a rogue website, while ensuring that law enforcement can get at the "worst-of-the-worst" websites dedicated to selling infringing goods. Copyright infringement and the sale of counterfeit goods reported cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of jobs, as well as billions of dollars in lost tax revenue for federal, state and local governments. . . .

The PROTECT IP Act will provide law enforcement with important tools to stop websites dedicated to online piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods, which range from new movie and music releases, to pharmaceuticals and consumer products. Key updates to the PROTECT IP Act include:

A narrower definition of an Internet site "dedicated to infringing activities";

Authorization for the Attorney General to serve an issued court order on a search engine, in addition to payment processors, advertising networks and Internet service providers;

Authorization for both the Attorney General and rights holders to bring actions against online infringers operating an internet site or domain where the site is "dedicated to infringing activities," but with remedies limited to eliminating the financial viability of the site, not blocking access;

Requirement of plaintiffs to attempt to bring an action against the owner or registrant of the domain name used to access an Internet site "dedicated to infringing activities" before bringing an action against the domain name itself;

Protection for domain name registries, registrars, search engines, payment processors, and advertising networks from damages resulting from their voluntary action against an Internet site "dedicated to infringing activities," where that site also "endangers the public health," by offering controlled or non-controlled prescription medication.

Reader Privacy Act of 2011

Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) has introduced the Reader Privacy Act of 2011 in the California State Senate.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Today, California Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) announced the Reader Privacy Act of 2011 – legislation that would require government agencies to seek a warrant or court order in order to access consumers' reading records from bookstores and online retailers. SB 602 would establish consumer protections for book purchases similar to long-established privacy laws for library records.

"Current law is completely inadequate when it comes to protecting one's privacy for book purchases, especially considering the increasing popularity of online shopping and electronic books," said Yee. "Individuals should be free to buy books without fear of government intrusion and witch hunts. If law enforcement has reason to suspect wrongdoing, they can obtain a warrant for such information."

Many bookstores already collect information about readers and their purchases. Digital book services can collect even more detailed information including which books are browsed, how long each page is viewed, and even digital notes made in the margins.

Historically, sensitive reader information has come under fire. During the McCarthy hearings of the 1950s, Americans were questioned about whether they had read Marx or Lenin. In the years following September 11, 2001, the FBI sought patron information from more than 200 libraries.

Just this past year, Amazon was asked by the North Carolina Department of Revenue to turn over 50 million purchase records including books, videos, and other expressive material.

SB 602 will update California state law to ensure that government and third parties cannot access Californians' reading records without proper justification. . . .

SB 602 will receive its first hearing in Senate Judiciary Committee in April.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

House Passes H.R.1, Blocks Funding for Implementing FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules

The U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R.1—Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011. Sixty-seven of 583 proposed amendments passed, including number 404 by Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) that blocks funding to support the implementation of the FCC's net neutrality rules and number 196 by Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) that cuts funding for the National Endowment for the Arts by $20.5 million.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Action Alert: Proposed FY2011 Continuing Resolution Amendment Would Eliminate Institute of Museum and Library Services’s Funding

A proposed amendment (no. 35) to the FY2011 Continuing Resolution amendment by U.S. Rep. Scott Garret (R-NJ) would eliminate the Institute of Museum and Library Services’s funding.

You can use the ALA's "ADVOCACY URGENTLY NEEDED: House Considering Two Amendments Critical to the Future Of Libraries" web page to contact your Representative about this issue.

In related news, President Obama's budget requests $242,605,000 for fiscal year 2012 for the IMLS.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Net Neutrality Alert: Public Knowledge Announces the "Internet Strikes Back" Day

Public Knowledge has announced the "Internet Strikes Back" Day (2/17/11) to support net neutrality.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Public Knowledge has set this Thursday, Feb. 17, as "Internet Strikes Back" day to counter Congressional opposition to a fair and open Internet.

The day was chosen because it is one day after members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee hold a hearing to unveil legislation that would roll back current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Net Neutrality rules and prohibit the Commission from enacting future rules. On that day following the hearing, members of the public are being asked to call their member of Congress and oppose the legislation.

PK has set up a Web site, www.theinternetstrikesback.org which will allow visitors to sign up for mobile action alerts, including a text message reminder, and download an Internet Strikes Back badge for web sites.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Action Alert: H.R. 408 Would Eliminate National Endowment for the Humanities

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) has introduced H.R. 408, the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which would eliminate the National Endowment for the Humanities. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) has introduced similar legislation (S. 178) in the Senate.

The National Humanities Alliance has posted two items about this issue: "Republican Study Committee Leaders Unveil Spending Reduction Act of 2011" and, on the DuraSpace Blog, "Proposal to Eliminate the National Endowment for the Humanities in U.S. Congress."

You can use the NHA's Legislative Action Center Contact Form to send messages to your Congressional representatives. The form includes suggested bullet points that you can include in your message.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

"Issue Brief: FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules and Implications for Research Libraries"

The Association of Research Libraries has released "Issue Brief: FCC's Net Neutrality Rules and Implications for Research Libraries."

Here's an excerpt:

FCC Votes to Enact "Net Neutrality" Rules: After years of debate and consideration, on December 21, 2010, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") voted 3-2 in favor of enacting a narrow set of net neutrality rules to regulate the practices of broadband providers. "Net neutrality" is the principle that Internet users should have the right to access and provide content and use services via the Internet as they wish, and that network operators should not be allowed to "discriminate"—slow, block, or charge fees—for Internet traffic based on the source or content of its message. . . .

The wording of the net neutrality rules, advanced by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, appears to reflect an attempt at a compromise between network operators and advocates for strong net neutrality protections—including ARL, ALA, and EDUCAUSE. Ultimately, however, the limited scope of protection in the rules has not fully satisfied the concerns voiced by parties on both sides of the issue and thus has set the stage for further debate over regulation in the courts and in Congress.

| Digital Scholarship |

America COMPETES Act Establishes Interagency Public Access Committee

The signing of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 by President Obama establishes a new Interagency Public Access Committee. The International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) has issued a press release that "applauds the efforts of US legislators in crafting the charter of the Interagency Public Access Committee."

Here's an excerpt from the Act:

SEC. 103. INTERAGENCY PUBLIC ACCESS COMMITTEE.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Director shall establish a working group under the National Science and Technology Council with

the responsibility to coordinate Federal science agency research and policies related to the dissemination and long-term stewardship of the results of unclassified research, including digital data and peer-reviewed scholarly publications, supported wholly, or in part, by funding from the Federal science agencies.

(b) RESPONSIBILITIES.—The working group shall—

(1) identify the specific objectives and public interests that need to be addressed by any policies coordinated under (a);

(2) take into account inherent variability among Federal science agencies and scientific disciplines in the nature of research, types of data, and dissemination models;

(3) coordinate the development or designation of standards for research data, the structure of full text and metadata, navigation tools, and other applications to maximize interoperability across Federal science agencies, across science and engineering disciplines, and between research data and scholarly publications, taking into account existing consensus standards, including international standards;

(4) coordinate Federal science agency programs and activities that support research and education on tools and systems required to ensure preservation and stewardship of all forms of digital research data, including scholarly publications;

(5) work with international science and technology counterparts to maximize interoperability between United States based unclassified research databases and international databases and repositories;

(6) solicit input and recommendations from, and collaborate with, non-Federal stakeholders, including the public, universities, nonprofit and for-profit publishers, libraries, federally funded and non federally funded research scientists, and other organizations and institutions with a stake in long term preservation and access to the results of federally funded research;

(7) establish priorities for coordinating the development of any Federal science agency policies related to public access to the results of federally funded research to maximize the benefits of such policies with respect to their potential economic or other impact on the science and engineering enterprise and the stakeholders thereof;

(8) take into consideration the distinction between scholarly publications and digital data;

(9) take into consideration the role that scientific publishers play in the peer review process in ensuring the integrity of the record of scientific research, including the investments and added value that they make; and

(10) examine Federal agency practices and procedures for providing research reports to the agencies charged with locating and preserving unclassified research.

(c) PATENT OR COPYRIGHT LAW.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to undermine any right under the provisions of title 17 or 35, United States Code.

(d) APPLICATION WITH EXISTING LAW.—Nothing defined in section

(b) shall be construed to affect existing law with respect to Federal science agencies’ policies related to public access.

(e) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit a report to Congress describing—

(1) the specific objectives and public interest identified under (b)(1);

(2) any priorities established under subsection (b)(7);

(3) the impact the policies described under (a) have had on the science and engineering enterprise and the stakeholders, including the financial impact on research budgets;

(4) the status of any Federal science agency policies related to public access to the results of federally funded research; and

(5) how any policies developed or being developed by Federal science agencies, as described in subsection (a), incorporate input from the non-Federal stakeholders described in subsection (b)(6).

(f) FEDERAL SCIENCE AGENCY DEFINED.—For the purposes of this section, the term ‘‘Federal science agency’’ means any Federal agency with an annual extramural research expenditure of over $100,000,000.

| Digital Scholarship |

ALA Issues Urgent Call to Action about Museum and Library Services Act

ALA has issued a urgent call to action about the reauthorization of the Museum and Library Services Act.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Please call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be transferred to your representative’s office. Tell their staffs that passing S. 3984, the Museum and Library Services Act (MLSA), is imperative to ensuring libraries can continue providing critical resources to their constituents, particularly in this tough economy. Specifically highlighting programs or resources your library provides to the member’s constituents will make your message stronger.

MLSA will ensure that the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds are secured and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is equipped to lead America’s libraries. This bill received bipartisan support from both Senate Republicans and Democrats, especially Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), who is a longtime supporter of libraries in this country. Other Senate sponsors of this bill include Sens. Richard Burr (R-NC), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Susan Collins (R-ME), Michael Enzi (R-WY), and Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Jon Tester (D-MT). To access the full text of this bill, click here.

The U.S. Senate passed MLSA Reauthorization under unanimous consent late Tuesday night, bringing the bill one step closer to reauthorization before the end of the 111th Congress.

MLSA has moved to the U.S. House of Representatives where it must receive a vote before the end of the calendar year. Please call your representative and urge him or her to press House leadership for a vote on the Senate-passed version of MLSA and to support the bill.

| Digital Scholarship |