BMJ  2003;327:1347 (6 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7427.1347-d

Letter

Paying for bmj.com

Is this measure scientific literature's half open sesame?

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—Over the past decade the BMJ has shown its commitment to widening access by providing universally free online content and reduced subscriptions for people in resource limited settings. Given its support for open access, it is regrettable that, in the face of falling paper sales, the journal should opt to squeeze subscriptions for the few years it has left instead of fully adopting the more progressive open access model.^{1 2}

Under the open access model, each article is paid for only once, subsequently becoming freely available to everyone (with internet access). This point is not being lost on funders. In the United States, the Public Access to Scientific Information Act seeks to place all scientific research substantially funded by government in the public domain.³ Currently, the US government spends $45bn annually on scientific research, the results of which are largely unavailable to taxpayers. The privatisation of scientific information by . . . [Full text of this article]

clarence.tam@lshtm.ac.uk, Health Protection Agency Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London NW9 5EQ

Health Protection Agency Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London NW9 5EQ

Public and Environmental Health Research Unit, Department of Public Health Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Paying for bmj.com

Tony Delamothe and Richard Smith
BMJ 2003 327: 241-242. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Scientific literature's open sesame?

Tony Delamothe, Fiona Godlee, and Richard Smith
BMJ 2003 326: 945-946. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Online poll

Find out more >>