In our field, it is time to support USENIX over IEEE and ACM, over the Open Access issue, too. I'm boycotting IEEE and ACM until they support Open Access.
Amazingly, they're going after authors making their own papers available!
IEEE is ridiculous. Sometimes I feel ashamed for admitting that I maintain an IEEE membership (which is really just for the journals anyway). And then I get even more annoyed when I look at how I pay IEEE something around $800.00 / year for all my society memberships and journal subs, and still routinely find that I don't have access to something I find while Googling, without paying another $30.00 or more.
This is all really leading me to want to get more involved in the whole IEEE governance process and maybe try to help spark some kind of initiative to cut down on the access fees for IEEE content. Or maybe an initiative like that already lives... I'm not sure. If there is, I feel like I should find it and get involved.
IEEE used to be a quasi-viable way for an individual to get decent insurance.
I love IACR, IFCA, USENIX. I kind of wish there were a "hacker con" organization equivalent to IFCA, covering the regional cons, defcon/blackhat, etc., for things like providing a searchable repository of papers, talks, etc., and maybe a common cfp repository.
Not quite sure this is true about the ACM. From their policy about rights permanently retained by the author [1]:
* Post the Accepted Version of the Work on (1) the Author's home page, (2) the Owner's institutional repository, or (3) any repository legally mandated by an agency funding the research on which the Work is based
* Post an "Author-Izer" link enabling free downloads of the Version of Record in the ACM Digital Library on (1) the Author's home page or (2) the Owner's institutional repository;
This wouldn't allow the author to post it to another repository, if not legally required, distinct from his home page. (It was IEEE which was more aggressive recently, but from reading Matt Blaze, it looks like ACM and IEEE have traded off that role; neither is as bad as Elsevier, but they're allegedly 'on our side' vs. a commercial publisher, so anything short of full OA brings dishonor to them.)
Amazingly, they're going after authors making their own papers available!