On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Stevan Harnad wrote [in part, in response to Richard Poynder]:
> What one wishes to conceal, one does not publish; what one publishes, > one does not wish to conceal. The only research at issue here is the > kind researchers wish to publish: the peer-reviewed research > literature.) In the biomedical field (and, especially, in the area of biotechnology), the issue of filing for patent protection of intellectual property prior to publication in the peer-reviewed research literature can be a significant one (if a possible "invention" is involved). At present, I suspect that even academically-oriented research groups, institutes and networks in this field would expect authors to file for patent protection of IP before self-archiving a preprint (e.g. one that's intended for subsequent publication in the peer-reviewed literature). There can be delays involved in the process of filing for patent protection. This can be a barrier in Canada, which uses a first-to-file approach to the protection of IP. The tech-transfer office of the university (or research institute or research network) needs to be well-supported, so that a backlog of requests for attention doesn't pile up, and self-archiving of preprints (or, submission to an open-access peer-reviewed journal, such as BioMed Central's new Journal of Biology) isn't unduly delayed (e.g. for some weeks, or even months). BTW, the Journal of Biology (see: http://www.jbiol.com/) permits copyright to be retained by the author. The editorial board of the Journal of Biology includes names of people who've played major roles in efforts to provide open access to the health-related research literature, such as Harold Varmus, currently at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, USA. I have no involvement with BioMed Central or the Journal of Biology (although I do know, and greatly respect, the latter's Editor-in-Chief, Martin Raff, of University College London, UK). Jim Till University of Toronto
