The document discusses the history and goals of the Public Library of Science (PLoS), an organization founded in 2000 to promote open access scientific publishing. PLoS circulated an open letter calling for freely accessible scientific literature and launched their own open access journals, PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine, after not enough publishers supported open access. The document also describes the author's personal experience with lack of access to scientific papers delaying treatment for his stillborn son, which reinforced his views that limiting access is unethical and counterproductive to advancing scientific knowledge.

1. Opening Up
Scientific and Scholarly Communication
Jonathan A. Eisen
@phylogenomics
February 26, 2018

2. Disclosures

3. Some History

4. Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Started in 2000 by
• Harold Varmus
• Pat Brown
• Michael Eisen
• First action was to circulate
an open letter on publishing

5. The Letter
We support the establishment of an online public library that would
provide the full contents of the published record of research and scholarly
discourse in medicine and the life sciences in a freely accessible, fully
searchable, interlinked form. Establishment of this public library would vastly
increase the accessibility and utility of the scientific literature, enhance
scientific productivity, and catalyze integration of the disparate communities of
knowledge and ideas in biomedical sciences.We recognize that the publishers
of our scientific journals have a legitimate right to a fair financial return for
their role in scientific communication. We believe, however, that the
permanent, archival record of scientific research and ideas should neither be
owned nor controlled by publishers, but should belong to the public and should
be freely available through an international online public library.To encourage
the publishers of our journals to support this endeavor, we pledge that,
beginning in September 2001, we will publish in, edit or review for, and
personally subscribe to only those scholarly and scientific journals
that have agreed to grant unrestricted free distribution rights to any
and all original research reports that they have published, through PubMed
Central and similar online public resources, within 6 months of their initial
publication date.

6. The Letter
We support the establishment of an online public library that would
provide the full contents of the published record of research and scholarly
discourse in medicine and the life sciences in a freely accessible, fully
searchable, interlinked form. Establishment of this public library would vastly
increase the accessibility and utility of the scientific literature, enhance
scientific productivity, and catalyze integration of the disparate communities of
knowledge and ideas in biomedical sciences.We recognize that the publishers
of our scientific journals have a legitimate right to a fair financial return for
their role in scientific communication. We believe, however, that the
permanent, archival record of scientific research and ideas should neither be
owned nor controlled by publishers, but should belong to the public and should
be freely available through an international online public library.To encourage
the publishers of our journals to support this endeavor, we pledge that,
beginning in September 2001, we will publish in, edit or review for, and
personally subscribe to only those scholarly and scientific journals
that have agreed to grant unrestricted free distribution rights to any
and all original research reports that they have published, through PubMed
Central and similar online public resources, within 6 months of their initial
publication date.

7. Signatories of Petition

8. Signed the Petition

9. My Brother Didn’t Want Me
J-
Can you get people to sign this and FAX it to me.
1-786-549-0137. Craig and
Claires sigs would be greatly appreciated.
I assume I can put your name on it, no?
I set up a site http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org
to keep lists of
people who have signed.
-M

10. PLoS After the Letter (2003)
• > 25,000 people signed the letter
• Small increase in open access
support
• But not enough
• So PLoS announced the launch of
their own journals
•PLoS Biology
•PLoS Medicine

11. Open Data Experiments

12. Open Data Experiments
Useful but not convinced

13. Real Life Intervened

14. RhoGam
• Supplier
• RhoGAM should be administered within 72 hours of
known or suspected exposure to Rh-positive red
blood cells.
• Wikipedia
• It is given by intramuscular injection as part of
modern routine antenatal care at about 28 weeks of
pregnancy, and within 72 hours after childbirth.[5] It
is also given after antenatal pathological events that
are likely to cause a feto-maternal hemorrhage.[6]
• Question
• What happens if you do it even later?

15. Pubmed Search

16. Relevant Paper

17. Paywall
You can purchase online access to this
article (and all its versions) for a 24-
hour period. Articles are US $ 29.95,
with some exceptions where prices may
vary. Click "Buy Now" to display the
price

18. Relevant Paper 2

19. Paywall

20. Access Blocked - What Next?
• Bought lots of articles
• Tried to contact experts
• Got friends to get some articles from libraries
• Got more and more pissed off

21. Baby Lost
• Benjamin Augustin Eisen stillborn August
29, 2003

22. Lack of Access
• Scientist without access
• Would access have helped?
• Is limiting access useful or needed?
• Goal of much of scientific and medical
research is to spread knowledge

23. Open Access Spreading …

24. Closed Accessitis Still Prevalent
Closed Accessitis
Elsevieritis

25. Cure for Closed Accessitis?
Closed Accessitis
Elsevieritis

26. What Can You Do?

27. 1. Support #OA
• Publish more openly
• Preprints
• Publish OA
• Support OA
• Cancel subscriptions
• Review only for OA papers
• Push funding agencies to require OA and pay for it
• Push societies and publishers to move more to OA
• Push for quality in OA publishing

28. 2. Be More Open About EVERYTHING
• Open Publishing
• Open Review
• Open Data
• Open Source
• Open Notebooks
• Open Grants
• Open Meetings
• Open Communications
• Open Hardware

29. 3. Assess people by Contributions
• Evaluate actual contributions not
surrogates
• ignore Impact Factor
• ignore Journal names
• Push for more recognition of diverse
contributions
• Hire, retain, promote people who
participate in open scholarship

30. 3. Use and Attribute Open Material
• Use open material
• Cite and attribute open material
• Remix and repurpose

31. Reduce Risks of Openness
• Open Publishing
• Open Review
• Open Data
• Open Source
• Open Notebooks
• Open Grants
• Open Meetings
• Open Communications
• Open Hardware