SHADOW GOVT ON STEROIDSThe BMJ has:
US Congress Introduces Bill To End Free Access To Federally Funded Research
Why is This a Horror?
The NIH (National Institutes of Health) handed out $28 BILLION of Your Money last year with the glib exculpation (after the Senate Finance Committee zoomed Dr. Seus DelBello) that it would be "Inappropriate and Impossible" to know What the Hell was Done with that $28 Billion.
NIH doesn't Know, because NIH doesn't want (You) to Know, what is done with that Money.
See the August 2007 Letter which Senator Grassley sent to former NIH Director Elias Zerhouni in our post:
FDA Stays Broken: Trifecta DEAD Last Hayburner Returns To Stud
And NIH Funded, Corrupt Research is NOT the only Govt Funded, Corrupt Research which H.R. 801 will Even Further Corrupt.
taxpayeraccess.org has:
OPPOSE H.R.801
February 11, 2009
Thanks to Senator Grassley the NIH subsequently suspended the last of a $9.3 Million NIH Grant to Emory University where Dr Charles Nemeroff - who had received a personal $2.8 Million from the makers of the drugs he was researching - was the Top Shrink. Dr Nemeroff and his $2.8 Million have since pulled a vanishing act.Last week, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (Rep. John Conyers, D-MI) re-introduced a bill that would reverse the NIH Public Access Policy and make it impossible for other federal agencies to put similar policies into place. The legislation is H.R. 801: the “Fair Copyright in Research Works Act” (http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.111hr801).
All supporters of public access – researchers, libraries, campus administrators, patient advocates, publishers, and others – are asked to please contact your Representative to express your support for public access to taxpayer-funded research and ask that he or she oppose H.R.801. Visit the Action Center for draft letter text.
H.R. 801 is designed to amend current copyright law and carves out a subclass of copyrighted works (Section 201, Title 17) -- precisely those that are supported by taxpayers -- and makes it illegal for the government to require that that special subclass be made freely available to taxpayers as a condition of the federal support. H.R. 801 significantly over-values the contribution made by publishers while ignoring not only the support of taxpayers, but also the interests of researchers, authors and peer-reviewers, all of whom contribute to the process of scholarly publishing without direct remuneration. In effect, it would:1. Prohibit all U.S. federal agencies from conditioning funding agreements to require that works resulting from federal support be made publicly available if those works are either: a) funded in part by sources other than a U.S. agency, or b) the result of "meaningful added value" to the work from an entity that is not party to the agreement.
2. Prohibit U.S. agencies from obtaining a license to publicly distribute, perform, or display such work by, for example, placing it on the Internet.
3. Stifle access to a broad range of federally funded works, overturning the crucially important NIH Public Access Policy and preventing other agencies from implementing similar policies.
4. Because it is so broadly framed, the proposed bill would require an overhaul of the well-established procurement rules in effect for all federal agencies, and could disrupt day-to-day procurement practices across the federal government.
5. Repeal the longstanding "federal purpose" doctrine, under which all federal agencies that fund the creation of a copyrighted work reserve the "royalty-free, nonexclusive right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use the work" for any federal purpose. This will severely limit the ability of U.S. federal agencies to use works that they have funded to support and fulfill agency missions and to communicate with and educate the public.
Because of the NIH Public Access Policy, millions of Americans now have access to vital health care information through the PubMed Central database. Under the current policy, nearly 3,000 new biomedical manuscripts are deposited for public accessibility each month. H.R.801 would prohibit the deposit of these manuscripts, seriously impeding the ability of researchers, physicians, health care professionals, and families to access and use this critical health-related information in a timely manner.
All supporters of public access -- researchers, libraries, campus administrators, patient advocates, publishers, and others -- are asked to contact their Representatives to let them know you support public access to federally funded research and oppose H.R. 801. Again, the proposed legislation would effectively reverse the NIH Public Access Policy, as well as make it impossible for other federal agencies to put similar policies into place.
Corrupt, Govt Funded Research like Nemeroff's needs to be DeFunded.
See our label:
Side Effects
It Must not be HIDDEN By a Shadow Government. The endemic Pharmaceutical COI corruption which is polluting medicine Wholesale needs to be Criminalized.
Private Industry and its Govt Regulatory Agencies (which are becoming virtually the Same entity) do NOT Own it, if even one cent of Your Money Paid for it.
That Research is Your Property: Just Like the FDA Adverse Psych Drug Reactions - which Sam @ psychdrugdangers.com had to dig out of FDA with FOIAs.
Here's that BMJ Extract
Jeanne Lenzer
1 New York
A bill has been introduced in the US Congress that would end free access to the results of published studies funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
The HR 801 bill, entitled the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act, would, if passed, overturn a public access bill that was passed in October 2007 (BMJ 2007;335:906, doi:10.1136/bmj.39384.638241.DB).
This requires researchers to deposit the results of studies with the National Library of Medicine for publication in PubMed Central within a year of publication in a peer reviewed journal. The current law only affects research funded by the National Institutes of Health.
The 2007 public access bill was supported by 26 Nobel prize winners, who signed a letter to Congress. Advocates of the bill said that patients and doctors would benefit from being able to access research findings in the PubMed database.
GovTrak has the Bill's Summary
Congressional Research Service Summary
The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress. GovTrack did not write and has no control over these summaries.
2/3/2009--Introduced.
Fair Copyright in Research Works Act - Prohibits any federal agency from imposing any condition, in connection with a funding agreement, that requires the transfer or license to or for a federal agency, or requires the absence or abandonment, of specified exclusive rights of a copyright owner in an extrinsic work.
Prohibits any federal agency from: (1) imposing, as a condition of a funding agreement, the waiver of, or assent to, any such prohibition; or (2) asserting any rights in material developed under any funding agreement that restrain or limit the acquisition or exercise of copyright rights in an extrinsic work.
Defines "funding agreement" as any contract, grant, or other agreement entered into between a federal agency and any person under which funds are provided by a federal agency for the performance of experimental, developmental, or research activities.
Defines "extrinsic work" as any work, other than a work of the U.S. government, that is related to a funding agreement and is also funded in substantial part by, or results from a meaningful added value contributed by, one or more nonfederal entities that are not a party to the funding agreement.
GovTrak also has the Text
This version: Introduced in House. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill available on this website.
HR 801 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
To amend title 17, United States Code, with respect to works connected to certain funding agreements.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 3, 2009
Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Mr. ISSA, Mr. WEXLER, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, and Mr. COHEN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
To amend title 17, United States Code, with respect to works connected to certain funding agreements.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
This Act may be cited as the ‘Fair Copyright in Research Works Act’.
SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REGARDING EXTRINSIC WORKS.
(a) In General- Section 201 of title 17, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
‘(f) Limitations on the Federal Government-
‘(1) LIMITATIONS REGARDING FUNDING AGREEMENTS- No Federal agency may, in connection with a funding agreement--
‘(A) impose or cause the imposition of any term or condition that--
‘(i) requires the transfer or license to or for a Federal agency of--
‘(I) any right provided under paragraph (3), (4), or (5) of section 106 in an extrinsic work; or
‘(II) any right provided under paragraph (1) or (2) of section 106 in an extrinsic work, to the extent that, solely for purposes of this subsection, such right involves the availability to the public of that work; or
‘(ii) requires the absence or abandonment of any right described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (i) in an extrinsic work;
‘(B) impose or cause the imposition of, as a condition of a funding agreement, the waiver of, or assent to, any prohibition under subparagraph (A); or
‘(C) assert any rights under this title in material developed under any funding agreement that restrain or limit the acquisition or exercise of rights under this title in an extrinsic work.
Any term, condition, or assertion prohibited under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) shall be given no effect under this title or otherwise.
‘(2) CONSTRUCTION-
‘(A) CERTAIN OTHER RIGHTS NOT LIMITED- Nothing in paragraph (1)(A)(i)(II) shall be construed to limit the rights provided to the copyright owner under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 106.
‘(B) NO NEW COPYRIGHT PROTECTION CREATED- Nothing in this subsection provides copyright protection to any subject matter that is not protected under section 102.
‘(3) DEFINITIONS- In this subsection:
‘(A) EXTRINSIC WORK- The term ‘extrinsic work’ means any work, other than a work of the United States Government, that is based upon, derived from, or related to, a funding agreement and--
‘(i) is also funded in substantial part by one or more other entities, other than a Federal agency, that are not a party to the funding agreement or acting on behalf of such a party; or
‘(ii) represents, reflects, or results from a meaningful added value or process contributed by one or more other entities, other than a Federal agency, that are not a party to the funding agreement or acting on behalf of such a party.
‘(B) FEDERAL AGENCY- The term ‘Federal agency’ means any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government.
‘(C) FUNDING AGREEMENT- The term ‘funding agreement’ means any contract, grant, or other agreement entered into between a Federal agency and any person under which funds are provided by a Federal agency, in whole or in part, for the performance of experimental, developmental, or research activities.’.
(b) Applicability- The amendment made by subsection (a) applies to any funding agreement that is entered into on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Report to Congressional Committees- Not later than the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Register of Copyrights shall, after consulting with the Comptroller General and with Federal agencies that provide funding under funding agreements and with publishers in the private sector, review and submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the Register’s views on section 201(f) of title 17, United States Code, as added by subsection (a) of this section, taking into account the development of and access to extrinsic works and materials developed under funding agreements, including the role played by publishers in the private sector and others.
(d) Definitions- In this section:
(1) EXTRINSIC WORK; FEDERAL AGENCY; FUNDING AGREEMENT- The terms ‘extrinsic work’, ‘Federal agency’, and ‘funding agreement’ have the meanings given those terms in section 201(f)(3) of title 17, United States Code, as added by subsection (a) of this section.
(2) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES- The term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
Banning Free Access to Govt funded Research is Exactly the same as Shutting You OUT of the Bathroom in the House You Paid for.
This turd appears to be still afloat in 2 Congressional Committees, and the American People need to phone it into the Tyranny Recycling Tank.
The Congressional Representatives sponsoring HR 801's Shadow Govt are listed below.
Rep John Conyers [D-MI14]Rep Robert Wexler [D-FL19]
Rep Darrell Issa [R-CA49]
Rep Carolyn Maloney [D-NY14]
Rep Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
Rep Trent Franks [R-AZ2]
In March this year Maplight.org reported Money from the American Assc of Publishers also underfloating this stinker.
Govtrak.us has Rep Darrell Issa as the Ranking member of the US House Committee on Govt Oversight and Reform
We're hoping this HR 801 Shadow Govt will Die or is Already Dead in Committee, but if these 6 tried it once, they'll try it again.
Tyranny has a habit of returning, hidden within larger appropriations Bills.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All standard cautions apply. Your milage may vary.
So Try to be an Adult, [no carpet F bombings, Pron, open threats, etc.] and not a Psychiatrist, about it. Google account, for now, is no longer required to comment, but moderation is in effect.