I do not actually have opinions on political or legislative issues. I am an AI assistant created by Anthropic to be helpful, harmless, and honest.

1. BIBLIOTHEKSPOLIZEI | UNIT 411
Research Works Act
AKA Greedy Bastards
Get Greedier

2. This Man
Darrell Issa (R-CA)

3. And This Women
Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY)

4. Grrrrrr
Want to take research which is federally funded
or rather funded by you and make sure that it is
not publicly available.

5. Poop List
What lunatic support this madness?
Association of American Publishers
&
Copyright Alliance

6. Who is opposed?
Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources
Coalition
the Alliance for Taxpayer Access
the American Library Association
the International Society for Computational
Biology

7. And….

8. Again…
“But a bill introduced in the House of Representatives last
month threatens to cripple this site. The Research Works
Act would forbid the N.I.H. to require, as it now
does, that its grantees provide copies of the papers they
publish in peer-reviewed journals to the library. If the bill
passes, to read the results of federally funded
research, most Americans would have to buy access to
individual articles at a cost of $15 or $30 apiece. In other
words, taxpayers who already paid for the research
would have to pay again to read the results. ”
http://nyti.ms/yTKdjH

9. Who buy a Politician to do something
so shady?
• If passed, the Research Works Act (RWA) would prohibit the
NIH's public access policy and anything similar enacted by
other federal agencies, locking publicly funded research
behind paywalls. The result would be an ethical disaster:
preventable deaths in developing countries, and an
incalculable loss for science in the USA and worldwide. The
only winners would be publishing corporations such as
Elsevier (£724m profits on revenues of £2b in 2010 – an
astounding 36% of revenue taken as profit).
http://bit.ly/Ar5jyP

10. Preventable Deaths?
“Closed access means people die. I don’t think
anyone can deny the truth of that conclusion. If a
doctor, a patient, a planner, an engineer, cannot
read the appropriate literature then they make
suboptimal decisions. And that means people die.
So the balance is: If we want a closed access
publishing system then we have to accept that the
price is people’s lives.” http://bit.ly/rp8V2a

11. One more time dammit…
“Elsevier-funded NY Congresswoman Carolyn
Maloney Wants to Deny Americans Access to
Taxpayer Funded Research”
http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=807

12. Issa is pro OPEN AKA
Online Protection and Enforcement of
Digital Trade Act
http://bit.ly/w7T2kW

13. OPEN? (Squint Hard!)
“The OPEN Act was proposed as an alternative to the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), which
was approved by the United States Senate Judiciary Committee in May 2011, and the
closely related Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which was introduced by House Judiciary
Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) in November. After an initial description on December 2
as an outline of possible approaches authored by a bipartisan group of eleven
lawmakers,[14][15] a draft text was made public on December 8, 2011 in advance of a
House Judiciary markup of the SOPA Act the following week. The OPEN Act seeks to
stop transfers of money to foreign websites whose primary purpose is piracy or
counterfeiting, whereas SOPA and PIPA also seek to require Internet providers and
search engines to redirect users away from viewing the sites. The PROTECT IP Act
proposed to do this by blocking domain name resolution, whereas SOPA imposes a
broader requirement for network providers to "prevent access by its subscribers
located within the United States" including blocking by IP address and possibly deep
packet inspection.[3]” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEN_Act

14. Now go tell them what you think.