 I spell out the argument a bit further. "Publishers have the right to refuse to publish any work for any reason. This is good and we should all celebrate it. Without this fundamental right [that is, if publishers were prohibited by law from refusing to publish certain work], publishing would be a propaganda arm of the state, and all publishing would lose credibility." <span id="p000"></span><span id="p000.0"></span> <span id="p000"></span><span id="p000.0"></span> * At [http://archive.org/stream/0000000000000OpenAccess/0000000000000_Open_Access#page/n000/mode/0up p. 000], I argue that the OA policy at the NIH does not violate copyright. Add this note. * At [http://archive.org/stream/0000000000000OpenAccess/0000000000000_Open_Access#page/n000/mode/0up p. 000], I argue that the OA policy at the NIH does not violate copyright. Add this note. 