A little "loophole" that might make everyone happy can be found here:
http://www.wwpdb.org/policy.html
search for "A re-refined structure based on the data from a different
research group"
Apparently, anyone can supersede any PDB entry, even if they weren't the
original depositor. All they need is a citation. Presumably, someone
could re-refine 2hr0 against the "data" that were deposited with it.
Possibly showing how to get an R-factor of 0% out of it. I'd definitely
cite that paper.
-James Holton
MAD Scientist
On 5/14/2014 11:01 AM, Nat Echols wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Mark Wilson <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
As for the meaning of integrity, I'm using this word in place of
others that
might be considered more legally actionable. A franker
conversation would
likely more clearly draw the line that we're wrestling with here.
The reference to "integrity" was Bernhard's - quoting the PDB mission
statement; I just disagree with his interpretation of the meaning. As
far as 2hr0 is concerned, I think we're quite safe calling it
"fraudulent" at this point, since (ironically) Nature itself has said
as much:
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091222/full/462970a.html
-Nat
