Guédon Jean-Claude
Département de Littérature Comparée, Université de Montréal, CP 6128, Succursale Centre-ville, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Med Sci (Paris). 2008 Jun-Jul;24(6-7):641-5. doi: 10.1051/medsci/20082467641.
The recent US law (H.R.2764) affecting NIH policy and the recent unanimous vote by the Arts and Science faculty of Harvard University in favour of a mandatory deposit of researchers' publications in a suitable repository have brought the Open Access movement into public light. After reviewing the historical background of Open Access, its evolution and extension in the United States, Great Britain, France and Canada are examined. Policies aiming at strengthening Open Access to scientific research are viewed as the direct consequence of treating scientific publishing as an integral part of the research cycle. It should, therefore, be wrapped into the financing of research. As the greater part of research is funded by public money, it appears legitimate to make its results as widely available as is possible. Open Access journals and repositories with strong deposit mandates form the backbone of the strategies to achieve the objective of Open Access. Despite the claims of some publishers, Open Access does not weaken or threaten the peer review process, and it does not conflict with copyright laws.
最近影响美国国立卫生研究院政策的美国法律（众议院法案2764）以及哈佛大学文理学院最近一致投票赞成强制要求研究人员将其出版物存放在合适的知识库中，这使得开放获取运动进入了公众视野。在回顾了开放获取的历史背景之后，考察了其在美国、英国、法国和加拿大的演变与扩展情况。旨在加强科研开放获取的政策被视为将科学出版视为研究周期不可或缺一部分的直接结果。因此，它应纳入研究资助范畴。由于大部分研究由公共资金资助，尽可能广泛地传播其研究成果似乎是合理的。具有强大存档要求的开放获取期刊和知识库构成了实现开放获取目标战略的核心。尽管一些出版商有所宣称，但开放获取并未削弱或威胁同行评审过程，也不与版权法相冲突。
