The success of the journal publishing marketplace is a prime illustration of how the copyright system should work to benefit both copyright owners and the public. As the Supreme Court has underscored, "(C)opyright law celebrates the profit motive, recognizing that the incentive to profit from the exploitation of copyrights would redound to the public benefit by resulting in the proliferation of knowledge.... The profit motive is the engine that ensures the progress of science."

Changes to the NIH Public Access policy are being considered in the United States Congress to mandate the deposit of peer reviewed journal articles to government-run websites. These policies could adversely impact the rights of U.S. copyright holders. Mandates requiring free online posting of journal articles within a limited timeframe after publication would allow for world-wide distribution, dissemination and download of copyrighted content. This in turn interferes with publishers' ability to exercise their rights as copyright holders. Copyright protections motivate publishers to continue to make substantial investments in content and infrastructure necessary to ensure widespread digital access to the broadest possible audience. By requiring the peer-reviewed manuscript of a journal article to be posted online and exposed to potential distribution through instantaneous, world-wide dissemination copyrights are effectively stripped of their value.

The Partnership for Research Integrity in Science and Medicine (PRISM) believes strongly in the public benefits that can be realized when copyrights are protected. Proposals to weaken those rights would have the unintended consequence of impairing the well-functioning, robust peer review and journal publishing process.