BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 609
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 609 (Nestande and Gatto)
As Amended May 28, 2013
Majority vote
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 8-2APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Allen, Buchanan, Cooley, |Ayes:|Gatto, Harkey, Bigelow, |
| |Gorell, Lowenthal, Olsen, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Quirk-Silva, Salas | |Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| | | |Hall, Ammiano, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, Wagner, Weber |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
|Nays:|Frazier, Medina |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires open access publication of research papers
when research has been funded by state agencies. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Requires grant recipients to provide public access to any
publication of a state agency-funded invention or technology
by ensuring that an electronic version of the final
peer-reviewed manuscript is submitted to the funding agency or
to an appropriate publicly accessible database approved by the
agency.
2)Requires that the manuscript be made publicly available within
12 months.
3)States the intent of the Legislature for all grantees to abide
by the publication requirements outlined in the California
Code of Regulations for stem cell research California
Institute of Regenerative Medicine grants.
4)Exempts grantees that receive funding from an agency that has
an existing publication requirement that meets or exceeds the
requirements in this bill.
EXISTING LAW authorizes the Department of General Services (DGS)
to carry out various duties relating to assisting a state agency
AB 609
Page 2
in the management and development of intellectual property.
Current law requires that, beginning January 1, 2015, and every
three years thereafter, DGS tracks and updates a database of
intellectual property generated by state employees or with state
funding. By January 1, 2018, DGS is required to:
1) Develop factors that state agencies should consider when
deciding whether to sell their intellectual property or
license it to others.
2) Develop an outreach campaign informing state agencies of
their rights and abilities concerning intellectual property
created by their employees.
3) Develop sample invention assignment agreements that
state agencies can consider if they believe it is necessary
to secure the rights to potentially patentable items
created by their employees on work time using state
resources.
4) Develop sample language for licenses or terms-of-use
agreements that state agencies can use to limit the use of
their intellectual property by others to only appropriate
purposes.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, the exact amount state agencies spend on funding
research each year is unknown. It is likely it is at least $250
million, based on research funding state agencies provide the
University of California. It is also unknown how much of that
funding results in peer-reviewed articles and papers.
However, to the extent that individuals receiving grant funding
for research would be required to pay approximately $3,000 in
fees associated with a peer review process and to publish their
findings on an open access database, it could result in cost
pressure in excess of $250,000 due to agencies increasing their
grant amounts to cover publishing costs.
COMMENTS : This bill requires grant recipients to provide public
access to any publication of a state agency-funded invention or
technology by ensuring that an electronic version of the final
peer-reviewed manuscript is submitted to the funding agency or
AB 609
Page 3
to an appropriate publicly accessible database approved by the
agency.
The bill would require free online public access to the final
peer-reviewed manuscripts or published version that was the
product of a state agency's research grant as soon as
practicable, but not later than 12 months after publication in
peer-reviewed journals. The bill does not set a dollar
threshold for the minimum amount of state-funded research that
would trigger the requirement so even small state grants towards
research would require the opening of access for these journal
articles. The University of California (UC) and California
State University (CSU) systems are not considered state agencies
under the bill and spending their direct research funds would
therefore not apply to the open access requirement. However, UC
or CSU researchers would still be subject to the public access
policies if they received grants from state agencies.
The author explains that the bill seeks to "ensure that the
public can access the published results of California
taxpayer-funded research for free." Specifically, the author
states that the cost to purchase academic journal subscriptions
or articles is expensive and that state-funded research should
be shared with the public.
The bill would only apply to articles that have been published
in peer-reviewed journals. The peer review process, which is
generally managed by journals, aims to ensure the quality of the
research by seeking the scrutiny of experts before articles are
published.
The Association of American Publishers, Inc. (AAP) opposes this
bill. It states that the bill "authorizes the government to
take private-sector journal articles to which publishers have
made significant value-added contributions." AAP contends that
while the government may fund original research, the publishers
add value by investing in the management of the peer review and
other processes. The AAP argues that the requirement of opening
access to journal articles would harm not-for-profit and
commercial publishers and negatively impact journal publishing
jobs in California.
The exact number of academic journals in California is unknown.
However, the University of California Press, which is the
AB 609
Page 4
publisher of the UC system, lists 57 journals on its Web site.
Supporters of this bill, which include UC, various
organizations, professors and researchers, state that requiring
open access would provide the public access to important
research and spur innovation and economic growth. They argue
that the results of publically-funded research should be made
available to the public.
Since 2008, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has had a
program in place that is similar to what is proposed by this
bill. Under the NIH Public Access Policy, investigators funded
by the NIH must submit an electronic version of their
peer-reviewed manuscripts no later than 12 months after journal
publication. Institutions and investigators are tasked with
ensuring that any publishing or copyright agreements concerning
submitted articles comply with the policy.
Under this bill, it is unknown how many articles that result
from state-funded research would be required to be posted within
one year of journal publication. According to UC, state agencies
funded approximately $236 million in UC research in Fiscal Year
2011-12. This represents about 5 % of the UC's $4.4 billion
research budget. However, the number of journal articles that
resulted from this state-funded research is unknown as UC does
not track the number of publications generated by awards. Also,
it is unknown what percent of these research results are already
publicly available since state agencies may provide grants to UC
researchers to conduct specific studies that result in reports
that are publicly-posted on state agencies' Web sites.
This bill places much of the onus on meeting the open access
requirements on researchers and contains limited oversight from
state departments.
As stated in the existing law section, DGS is in the process of
providing guidance related to managing intellectual property,
which includes publications. The proposed bill appears to be
premature in that it sidesteps that process before such guidance
has been provided.
Analysis Prepared by : Scott Herbstman / A. & A.R. / (916)
319-3600
AB 609
Page 5
FN: 0000819