See this comment:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all-that/#comment-46779
Last week, Bush signed a bill on America COMPETES. There is a relevant part on the open exchange of data and metadata:
SEC. 1009. RELEASE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH RESULTS.
(a) Principles- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the heads of all Federal civilian agencies that conduct scientific research, shall develop and issue an overarching set of principles to ensure the communication and open exchange of data and results to other agencies, policymakers, and the public of research conducted by a scientist employed by a Federal civilian agency and to prevent the intentional or unintentional suppression or distortion of such research findings. The principles shall encourage the open exchange of data and results of research undertaken by a scientist employed by such an agency and shall be consistent with existing Federal laws, including chapter 18 of title 35, United States Code (commonly known as the `Bayh-Dole Act). The principles shall also take into consideration the policies of peer-reviewed scientific journals in which Federal scientists may currently publish results.
As a climate researcher, I wholeheartedly support the above principles. In my opinion research scientists (and particularly government research scientists) should not be given any choice in this matter if they wish to receive government research funding, publish their research in the peer reviewed journals of the major professional societies, and have their data used in assessment reports.
Yes all this adds to the cost of doing research, and even the COMPETE bill is apparently an unfunded mandate. But its a cost we need to accommodate in some way. I have seen too many examples in the climate field where scientists do not want to make their data and metadata available to skeptics such as Steve McIntyre since they dont want to see their research attacked (and this has even been condoned by a funding agency). Well, in the world of science, if you want your hypotheses and theories to be accepted, they must be able to survive attacks by skeptics. Because of its policy importance, climate research at times seems like blood sport. But in the long run, the credibility of climate research will suffer if climate researchers dont take the high ground in engaging skeptics.