User:KLindblom/American Chemical Society

Open access
In debates about free access to scientific information, the ACS has been described as "in an interesting dilemma, with some of its representatives pushing for open access and others hating the very thought." The ACS has generally opposed legislation that would mandate free access to scientific journal articles and chemical information, however it has recently launched new open access journals and provided authors with open access publishing options.

Journals
The mid-2000s saw a debate between some research funders (including the federal government), which argued that research they funded should be presented freely to the public, and some publishers (including the ACS), which argued that the costs of peer-review and publishing justified their subscription prices. In 2006, Congress debated legislation that would have instructed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to require all investigators it funded to submit copies of final, peer-reviewed journal articles to PubMed Central, a free-access digital repository it operates, within 12 months of publication. At the time the American Association of Publishers (of which ACS is a member) hired a public relations firm to counter the open access movement. In spite of publishers' opposition, the PubMed Central legislation was passed in December 2007 and became effective in 2008.

As the open access issue has continued to evolve, so too has the ACS's position. In response to a 2013 White House Office of Science and Technology Policy directive that instructed federal agencies to provide greater access to federally funded research, the ACS joined other scholarly publishers in establishing the Clearinghouse for the Open Research of the United States (Chorus) to allow free access to published articles. The ACS has also introduced several open access publishing options for its journals, including providing authors the option to pay an upfront fee to enable free online access to their articles. In 2015 the ACS launched the first fully open access journal in the society's history, ACS Central Science. The ACS states that the journal offers the same peer-review standards as its subscription journals, but without publishing charges to either authors or readers. A second open access title, ACS Omega, an interdisciplinary mega journal, launched in 2016.

Databases
In 2005, the ACS was criticized for opposing the creation of PubChem, which is an open access chemical database developed by the NIH's National Center for Biotechnology Information. The ACS raised concerns that the publicly supported PubChem database would duplicate and unfairly compete with their existing fee-based Chemical Abstracts Service and argued that the database should only present data created by the Molecular Libraries Screening Center initiative of the NIH.

The ACS lobbied members of the United States Congress to rein-in PubChem and hired outside lobbying firms to try to persuade congressional members, the NIH, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) against establishing a publicly funded database. The ACS was unsuccessful, and as of 2012 PubChem is the world's largest free chemical database.

Litigation
As a major provider of chemistry related information, ACS has been involved with several legal cases over the past few decades that involve access to its databases, trademark rights, and intellectual property. These include Dialog v. American Chemical Society, a suit claiming antitrust violations in access to ACS databases, settled out of court in 1993 ; American Chemical Society v. Google, a suit claiming trademark violation, settled out of court in 2006 ; and American Chemical Society v. Leadscope, a suit alleging stolen trade secrets, concluded in 2012 with ACS losing its trade secrets claim and Leadscope losing its counterclaim of defamation.

Executive compensation
In 2004, a group of ACS members criticized the compensation of former executive director and chief executive officer John Crum, whose total salary, expenses, and bonuses for 2002 was reported to be $767,834. The ACS defended the figure, saying that it was in line with that of comparable organizations, including for-profit publishers. When Madeleine Jacobs became executive director of the ACS in 2004 she reduced expenditures on travel, hotel expenses, and chauffeurs, moves that earned her praise as a judicious spender.