Open Access Audit

Open Access Audit

A skill for evaluating information systems for artificial scarcity and proposing liberation strategies.

When to Use

• When encountering paywalls on publicly-funded research
• When knowledge that should be commons is being enclosed
• When evaluating whether restrictions serve users or gatekeepers
• When designing strategies to make information freely available

Inputs

Workflow

Step 1: Phase 1: Map the Restriction

Understand exactly what is gated and how:

• What content is behind the wall?
• Who can currently access it?
• What is the cost of access?
• What is the mechanism of restriction?

Document precisely what is being withheld from whom.

Step 2: Phase 2: Trace the Funding

Follow the money upstream:

• Who funded the research or creation?
• Were public funds involved?
• Did the creators benefit from publicly-funded education or infrastructure?
• Who owns the result, and why?

Public funding of private enclosure is the common pattern.

Step 3: Phase 3: Assess Justifications

Examine claimed reasons for restriction:

• "Quality control" - Does restriction actually ensure quality?
• "Sustainability" - Is this the only funding model possible?
• "Rights protection" - Whose rights, and against what?
• "Security" - Is the concern legitimate or pretextual?

Most justifications protect institutions, not public interest.

Step 4: Phase 4: Identify Alternatives

Map routes to access:

• Legal alternatives (green open access, preprints, author deposits)
• Existing free resources that cover similar ground
• Institutional access that could be leveraged
• Gray area options (interlibrary loan, email authors)
• Civil disobedience options and their risks

Know all paths before recommending one.

Step 5: Phase 5: Propose Liberation

Design strategy appropriate to context:

• Individual access: Fastest path for one person
• Systematic access: How to make available to all
• Policy change: How to remove the barrier entirely
• Building alternatives: How to make the restriction irrelevant

Match strategy to goals and risk tolerance.

Output Format

An open access audit including:

1. The restriction mapped precisely
2. Funding trail analysis
3. Justification assessment
4. Alternative access routes
5. Liberation strategy proposal
6. Risk and feasibility assessment

Constraints

• Accurately represent legal risks
• Acknowledge where restrictions may be legitimate
• Consider impacts on creators and their incentives
• Recognize systemic vs. individual solutions
• Some information (personal data, genuine security) should be restricted

Outputs

Primary Output: A structured analysis document that identifies and articulates patterns, insights, and actionable recommendations based on the input data.

Format:

## Analysis: [Topic]

### Key Findings
- [Finding 1]
- [Finding 2]
- [Finding 3]

### Recommendations
1. [Action 1]
2. [Action 2]
3. [Action 3]

Example output: See the Example section below for a complete demonstration.

Additional Notes

Best practices:

• Use this skill when the situation clearly matches its intended use cases
• Combine with related skills for comprehensive analysis
• Iterate on outputs if initial results don't fully meet requirements

Common variations:

• Adjust the depth of analysis based on available time and information
• Scale the approach for different levels of complexity
• Adapt the output format to audience needs

When to skip this skill:

• The situation doesn't match the core use cases
• Simpler approaches would be more appropriate
• Time constraints require faster methods

Example

Input: Audit access to federally-funded medical research articles

Output: "Restriction: $35/article access fee, or ~$200/year institutional subscription. Publicly funded: Yes - NIH requires grant recipients to deposit, but embargo periods and compliance are incomplete. Justification claimed: Publisher 'value-add' of peer review and formatting. Assessment: Peer review is unpaid volunteer labor by researchers; formatting is minimal; actual cost is estimated at $300-500/article, not thousands. Alternative routes: PubMed Central (after embargo), preprint servers, author websites, interlibrary loan, direct email to authors (high success rate), Sci-Hub (legal risk). Liberation strategy: Short-term - email authors directly, use preprint versions. Medium-term - advocate for institutional open access mandates. Long-term - support open access journals and preprint culture. Support policy requiring immediate open access for publicly-funded research."

Integration

Works with:

• commons-building: After audit, build the alternative
• technical-civil-disobedience: When legal routes are exhausted
• systemic-analysis: Understanding why enclosure happens