Hi Peter, On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Peter Murray-Rust <[email protected]> wrote: > If this is truly data it is better to declare it as Open data and choose a > licence compatible with that PPDL or CC0.
Thanx for brining this up. The current MIT license was picked as best thing around at the time. When I made the release last month, I already planned to bring up relicensing as CC0, but been too busy and forgot. > There should be no concept of > owner, though you should attribute the authorship. The current copyright owners are: Geoff Hutchinson Carsten Niehaus Egon Willighagen Jörg Buchwald Martin Pfeiffer Can all please respond to this: Do you agree to relicense your BODR MIT contributions as Creative Commons Zero (CC0)? Konstantin, you could simply mark your data as CC0. > If you have taken it > straight from someone else's compilation (e.g. Merck Handbook) you might be > breaking copyright though you may not. It's a gray area. Indeed. Which is why we need clear statements. Konstantin, is your source literature primary literature? That would be ideal by far... I do not have email addresses of Jörg Buchwald and Martin Pfeiffer... if you have contact addresses for either or both, please let me know. Egon -- Post-doc @ Uppsala University Proteochemometrics / Bioclipse Group of Prof. Jarl Wikberg Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/ Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/ PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss
