Author Archives: Corey Williams

Senator Harkin calls for access to copyrighted works for print disabled

Last week, Senator Harkin (D-IA) wrote a letter to President Obama to express his support for a “…international treaty to expand access to copyrighted information for people with disabilities around the world.”

In his letter, Senator Harkin explains,

Blind people and others with print disabilities now face daunting challenges in obtaining access to accessible formats of copyrighted works in many parts of the world. The barriers to such access are in part due to two different factors. First, according to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), many countries have inadequate or no statutory rights for people with disabilities regarding access to information. Second, most countries that do provide for exceptions in copyright for people with disabilities do not permit the export of copies of works in accessible formats to foreign countries, leading to costly duplication of efforts in an area where resources are limited. As a result, people with disabilities have very limited access to accessible formats of copyrighted works. These disparities are particularly severe for people living in developing countries, or for people who need to access works in different languages.

The ALA has long been engaged in advocating for equitable access to information for all, including those with print and other disabilities.  We continue to work with International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) to draw attention to the fact that this issue exists in this modern, technologically advanced 21st century.

It is shocking that here in our country only 5 percent of works published in the U.S. are available in formats accessible for people with print disabilities.  Just imagine the good it would do those in other countries that are even worse off if cross-border sharing of accessible content became a lawful reality.  That is why the ALA also works closely with the U.S. delegation comprised of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the U.S. Copyright Office, the U.S. Department of State and others to ensure equitable access rights here at a home and then promotes them internationally.

And, finally a quick aside – there are two of us here in the ALA Washington Office that proudly hail from the Hawkeye State. Ted, our Grassroots Coordinator is from Des Moines and I am from Albia, Iowa.  We are especially pleased that Senator Harkin is advocating on behalf of people with disabilities not only in Iowa, but around the world.

Corey Williams
Associate Director, Office of Government Relations
American Library Association

FRPAA gains co-sponsors and a Congressional hearing

The Federal Research Public Works Act (FRPAA) of 2012, H.R. 4004, gained traction this week in the U.S. House of Representatives. Kicking off the week on Monday Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) held a Congressional briefing on the issue of public access to the results of taxpayer-funded research.  Two experts presented on the topic, Dr. Neil Thakur from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Elliott Maxwell from the Committee for Economic Development, and Heather Joseph of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) moderated the discussion. Additional information on the briefing is available here.

On Tuesday, FRPAA picked up a whopping 24 additional co-sponsors (yes, both democrats and republicans) – joining Rep. Mike Doyle (D- PA), Rep. Lacy Clay (D-MO) and Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-KS), the original co-sponsors who introduced the bill.  Among the additional co-sponsors backing the bill was Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), who was presented with the 2012 James Madison Award by the American Library Association (ALA) during the annual Freedom of Information Day event held here in Washington, DC on March 16.  Rep. Lofgren was recognized for her work on supporting a wide range of library-related issues, including open access and FRPAA legislation.

Then on Thursday the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology’s Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight added to its schedule a hearing for March 29 that has been moved up to 9:30 a.m. at 10:00 a.m. on Examining Public Access and Scholarly Publication Interests.  Additional information about the upcoming hearing, including the list of witnesses and a link to the webcast, is available here.

The ALA has a strong history of support for FRPAA legislation – as it builds on the success of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy implemented in 2008.  Passage of H.R. 4004 and its companion in the Senate, S. 2096, would be big step in the right direction by expanding the amount of research made available and proving access to it without additional charge to us, the taxpayers. Background on this legislation is available on the ALA website.

Corey Williams
Associate Director, Office of Government Relations
American Library Association

Research Works Act Abandoned – Open Access Week in Review

This week brought with it the demise of an anti-open access bill that was wildly unpopular with ALA members – the Research Works Act (H.R. 3699).  On Monday, the publishing company Elsevier (the rumored bill backer) publicly announced it was withdrawing support for the Research Works Act – essentially rendering the bill dead.  And just to be sure there were no misgiving about the bill’s status, its co-sponsors, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), released a joint statement explaining,

The American people deserve to have access to research for which they have paid. This conversation needs to continue and we have come to the conclusion that the Research Works Act has exhausted the useful role it can play in the debate. As such, we want Americans concerned about access to research and other participants in this debate to know we will not be taking legislative action on HR 3699, the Research Works Act.

The New York Times weighed in by publishing a piece on the topic and explained the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is also working on the access issue and is preparing a progress report to be submitted to Congress in a few weeks. (The ALA and Association of College & Research Libraries submitted comments (pdf) to OSTP in response to their call for input in December.)

Library Journal reported on the development as well, and said “The publisher [Elsevier] had been the target of a boycott among academics…”

Then yesterday the Washington Times published an article titled Scientists Protest Cost of Research Journals that links the backlash of epic proportions by academics against Elsevier with Elsevier’s succumbing to pulling the plug on the Research Works Act.

So where does this leave open access, publishing and current legislation? For one thing, academics have united and are pushing back on existing publishing models which require the public to “pay twice” for access to federally funded research (i.e. taxpayers funding the research being conducted and then paying again to access the resulting peer-reviewed journal articles). For another, with the Research Works Act essentially abandoned, the path is clear to focus our energy on moving positive legislation that would expand access to federally funded research (paid by taxpayers, us!).

As luck would have it the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA) of 2012  (S. 2096, H.R. 4004) was recently introduced in both the Senate and the House and enjoys bipartisan support.    In a recent blog post heralding FRPAA’s introduction, I pointed out that its passage would be a big step in the right direction by expanding the amount of research made available and providing access to it without additional charges to us, the taxpayers – in step with what Reps. Issa and Maloney say the American people deserve.

The ALA has a strong history of support for FRPAA legislation – as it builds on the success of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy implemented in 2008.  In addition, the ALA and ACRL also joined a recent coalition letter (pdf) thanking FRPAA’s co-sponsors for reintroducing the legislation. ALA members can expect to receive notice of a call to action at key junctures as we work to seek passage of this pro-open access legislation.

Corey Williams
Associate Director, Office of Government Relations
American Library Association

It’s FRPAA time! Pro-open access legislation introduced in House and Senate

Yesterday members in both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives introduced identical bills  with bipartisan support aimed at improving access to federally funded research.  In the House, the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2012 (or FRPAA) (H.R. 4004) was introduced in the morning by Rep.  Doyle (D-PA) and co-sponsored by Reps. Yoder (R-KS) and Clay (D-MO), and referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.  In the Senate, a bill by the same name (S. 2096) was introduced late in the day by Sens. Cornyn (R-TX) and co-sponsored by Senators Wyden (D-OR) and Hutchison (R-TX), and then referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs.

If passed, the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2012 would:

  • Require federal departments and agencies with an annual extramural research budget of $100 million to develop a policy to ensure researchers submit an electronic copy of the final manuscript 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.

Sound familiar? It should – these bills are essentially identical to FRPAA legislation introduced in previous Congresses dating back to 2006.  The ALA has a history of strong support for this type of legislation – as they build on the success of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy implemented in 2008.  If you recall, the NIH Public Access Policy ensures that the public have access to the published results of NIH funded research no later than 12 months after publication. FRPAA legislation would be a big step in the right direction by expanding the amount of research made available and providing access to it to no later than 6 months after publication.

Rep. Doyle sums up the intent of the legislation by stating in his press release,

Americans have the right to see the results of research funded with taxpayer dollars….Yet such research too often gets locked away behind a pay-wall, forcing those who want to learn from it to pay expensive subscription fees for access.

Bottom line – our patrons, the American public, should not have to fund federal research with their tax dollars and then have to pay for it again to access it.  The ALA has been a long-time, ardent supporter of increasing access to information of all types, including federally funded research. Thus, the ALA is a strong supporter of FRPAA legislation and will advocate for passage of these bills.

But wait, there’s more! FRPAA is also the perfect antidote to the bitter anti-open access “pill” being pushed by Rep. Issa in the House with his Research Works Act bill (H.R. 3699).  Rep. Issa’s bill, if passed, would nullify the NIH Public Access policy and prevent any such similar policies from being implemented.  Let’s shift the conversation and focus our energy on legislation that improves access to the public (i.e. taxpayers).  Today’s (re)introduction of FRPAA legislation is a positive and welcome addition to improving access to federally funded research.

Corey Williams
Associate Director, Office of Government Relations
American Library Association

Additional resources:

ALA applauds Internet blackout in opposition to PIPA, SOPA

The American Library Association (ALA) applauds the numerous websites that have taken to the Internet to protest two Congressional bills – PIPA and SOPA – in a very public way. By either going dark or brandishing their website with a black box, sites such as Wikipedia, Reddit, Craigslist, Google, Tumblr and many others, are demonstrating in a very real way the potential impact of these bills.

The day-long blocking of websites highlights the outright denial of access to information these bills would likely impose.  Ironically, for two bills that are supposed to combat “foreign” counterfeiting or copyright infringing, today’s demonstration highlights how they would likely hit home right here in the U.S.

The ALA is on the record having taken a strong stance in opposition to these bills and we also constructed the PIPA, SOPA and OPEN Act Quick Reference Guide (pdf).  In addition, the ALA deplores any legislation that would incentivize and likely increase surveillance of online activity promoted by these bills.  These bills, if passed, would likely blanket Internet activity with an immediate chilling effect – on first amendment free speech rights, intellectual freedom and privacy rights, among others.

Corey Williams
Associate Director
Office of Government Relations