Slashdot Mirror


New Bill Proposes Open Source Requirement for Publicly Funded Books

fsufitch writes "On September 30th, the 'Open College Textbook Act of 2009' was introduced to the Senate and referred to committee. The bill proposes that all educational materials published or produced using federal funds need to be published under open licenses. The reasoning behind it takes into account the changing way information is distributed because of the Internet, the high price of college and textbooks, and the dangerously low college graduation rates in the US. Will a bill such as this endanger publishing companies in the same way Internet journalism endangers traditional journalism?"

1 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Seems fair to me. by zolltron · · Score: 5, Informative

    If this bill passes, it won't change anything. The professors that write these books will simply reject the U.S. funds

    That's just not possible. Almost all universities run on federal funds. If a given professor's research isn't sponsored by federal funds, the cost of the building in which she works almost certainly is (at least in part). The concept of "rejecting" U.S. funds is like rejecting your paycheck, you worked hard to earn it, you take it.

    and get money from other places like IBM, Microsoft, Ford, and so on.

    These places are giving out money for biology, chemistry, theoretical high energy physics, english, history, philosophy, sociology, psychology?!? Maybe a little, but not much.

    Professors want to be reimbursed for their many hours of work, not give books away for free (or cheap).

    First, we (professors) are reimbursed, we're paid by our university to produce exactly this sort of work. So, professors who are being paid for their textbooks are (in a sense) double dipping. We are also grossly underpaid for the amount of work and the level of qualifications, so I can't really fault someone for this, but it is double dipping.

    Second, we don't get much for books. We do give them away for cheap.