Friday, March 06, 2009
Conyers, Eisen, the Huffington Post and Open Access
In case you are not aware, my brother (Michael Eisen) and Larry Lessig have been engaging in a public "debate" with John Conyers over Conyers' sponsorship of a bill to revoke the NIH policy on Open Access to publications. First the elder Eisen and Lessig wrote a posting:Is John Conyers Shilling for Special Interests? which they then followed up with John Conyers, It's Time to Speak Up. Now Conyers has written a reply: A Reply to Larry Lessig (which I note should have been titled A Reply to Eisen and Lessig, but that is for another day). Anyway it is worth reading them all and if I had not been sick for the last like 3-4 weeks I would write more but I have a million things to catch up on now that I have mostly gotten rid of nasty microbe #3.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Most recent post
Another day to think, to pause, to ponder.
Panorama of Sycamore Park and the memorial to Karim A bit over 10 years ago I wrote a blog post that I repost all the time. Entitled "...
-
I have a new friend in Google Scholar Updates I have written about the Updates system before and if you want more information please see... -
See Isolation and sequence-based characterization of a koala symbiont: Lonepinella koalarum Paper based on PhD thesis work of Katie Dahlha...
-
Just got this press release by email. I am sick of receiving dozens of unsolicited press releases, especially those in topics not related ...
Conyers is hilarious. The guy just digs himself in the more he talks -- rather like Blagojevich.
ReplyDeleteTo hear Professor Lessig tell it, I introduced a bill that is utterly without merit and entirely the product of shady special interest dealing. Without any evidence to support his contention (other than my receipt of what can only be described as modest contributions from publishers), he labels my motivations for introducing this bill as "corrupt," accuses me of "shilling" for "Big Paper," and dismisses the whole thing as nothing more than a "money for influence scheme."
So, Conyers *admits* he introduced a bill favoring the publishers' interests after accepting money from them (the amount doesn't matter, if it wasn't that much it just means he's easily bought).
I've written a long dissection of his "logic":
ReplyDeletehttp://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=234
I am collecting responses to this as they come in.
ReplyDelete