I appreciate the time and effort taken by Dr. Dylla in providing his critique of "The Future of Taxpayer-Funded Research: Who Will Control Access to the Results?" In the five reports that the Committee for Economic Development (CED) has issued analyzing the increased "openness" made possible by the rise of the Internet and the digitization of information, the most salient benefit to emerge is that more people can contribute their ideas and insights, making all of us collectively wiser. It is in that spirit that I respond to Dr. Dylla.^[i]

CRITIQUE

As a career scientist, now head of the largest group of scientific society publishers in physics, I hold scholarship to very high standards. Regrettably, the new CED report, "The Future of Taxpayer-Funded Research: Who Will Control Access to the Results?,"¹ lacks the rigor, impartiality and logic necessary to help advance informed discussion on public access to the scientific literature. Instead of shedding light on a complex, dynamic subject, this report merely continues to inflame the debate and leads us away from a solution that benefits all stakeholders.