With CC Signals, Creative Commons wants to help authors put rules on use of their licensed content for AI training. The problem is, one of the licenses already permits free and unlimited reuse of that content, for any and all purposes. And the licenses are irrevocable.
Guest blogger Jonny Coates looks at Richard Poynder’s post-mortem on the Open Access movement, and uses it as a framework to ask questions about the future of preprints.
As AI systems increasingly reason from the scientific literature, the integrity signals that make research trustworthy — open data, structured metadata, robust retraction processes — matter more than ever. PLOS CEO Alison Mudditt on why open access publishers have a different set of obligations in an AI world.
In this post, Robert attempts to embrace a gloomy optimism as he muses on the state of publishing at scholarly societies.
Today’s post is an urgent call to push back against global trends in academic censorship and threats to free speech in scholarly communications.
PIDfest is back and you’re invited! Find out more in today’s post by Alice Meadows about PIDfest 2026 (October 27-29, Leiden, The Netherlands).
Today’s guest blogger asks: What would it mean to support community-led publishing as infrastructure, rather than as a collection of heroic individual efforts?
In this interview with Alice Meadows, Sami Benchekroun (Morressier/Molecular Connections) and Rod Cookson (The Royal Society) share their thoughts about how and why scholarly publishing needs to move away from being article-based.
Is open scholarship an honest signal of researcher integrity? We present preliminary evidence that data and code sharing, preprinting, and other open behaviors are indeed less common in papermill articles.
Todd Carpenter looks back on the past quarter century of a digital revolution in scholarly publishing.
At the STM innovation and Integrity days in London last week, it’s clear that research integrity has become an increasingly pressing issue. Many publishers are reporting significant increases in submissions of questionable legitimacy. perhaps now is the time for a new alliance between publishers, funders, institutions and researchers to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, before it’s too late.
Academic publishing ia reaching a breaking point. Unless we redesign it, we risk stalling the very progress we seek – with consequences impacting research, education and public trust in academia.
Today, Alison Mudditt reflects on a Charleston Conference session that asked: what would it take to make the scholarly communication system truly equitable, impactful, and future-ready?
Each new change in scholarly communication promises to make research fairer, faster, more transparent. Yet, in many cases, researchers, especially from under resourced countries or from countries where English is not the first language, face added pressure to catch up, rather than to move forward.
Today’s guest post is by Meagan Phelan of AAAS, who asks: If more research is openly available than ever before, and open is framed as a way to build trust, why isn’t public trust in science at an all-time high?