Hi Jon, hi Charles, On 26.09.17 09:31, Jon Ison wrote: > Dear Charles & fellow Debianoids, > > Forgive the blatant sales pitch, but you’re very welcome to the bio.tools > data (all of it) which is licensed > (http://biotools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/license.html) under Creative > Commons Attribution licence (CC BY 4.0), which I hope suits your purposes > (please let me know otherwise - I'll consider changing it if necessary).
Sounds all good to me. > We recently completed a major clean-up of the bio.tools tool IDs, as used in > our (hopefully now persistent) URLs, e.g. > > https://bio.tools/signalp > https://bio.tools/api/signalp The references that were added all left out the "https://bio.tools/"-prefix. I have noted the many changes you have introduced over the past weeks. > > The tool IDs are a URL-safe version of (normally identical to) the supplied > tool names, but a big clean-up was necessary, for reasons I’ll spare you here. :) Concerning OMICtools, I personally think that as long as no data of ours flows into their protective setup, I do not mind anything that does not interfere with what we are doing - live and let live. And Charles is damn right that we need to ensure that there is no evil interpretation of any references of ours. I mean - there is chance that us featuring their IDs would direct search engine results for that ID to our site instead of theirs. I propose to wait for a public statement from OMICtools that they are happy with us showing their IDs next to our packages, even when this has the gestalt of a catalog of our software. Best, Steffen > > Take care all > > Jon > > > Jon Ison > Senior Researcher > High Performance Computing > DTU Bioinformatics > > Technical University of Denmark > Department of Bio and Health Informatics > Kemitorvet > Building 208, Room 013 > 2800 Kgs. Lyngby > Direct +45 45252477 > [email protected] > www.dtu.dk/english > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Plessy [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 26 September 2017 08:08 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Concerns about OMICTOOLS terms of service.. > > Hello everybody, > > it is really great to provide references to metadata repositories that help > describing the software that we distribute. > > However, I have looked at the terms of use of OMICtools and I have serious > concerns: > > https://omictools.com/terms-of-use > > On one hand, the data seems to be Free: > >> The user is authorized to modify, extract (i.e., permanently or >> temporarily >> transfer) and reuse all or part of substantial data, in qualitative or >> quantitative terms, that is contained in the database. > But on the other hand, the "database" holidng the data is protected: > >> The user shall be informed that the database architecture, its >> presentation, its layout and the method of classification of data >> listed therein, such as described above, are protected by copyright. >> >> The user has a simple right of use on said database with a view to the >> access, consultation, modification, extraction and reuse of data in >> the conditions provided in this agreement. >> >> Therefore, the user has no right to reproduce, adapt, translate or represent >> the database. >> >> The user also undertakes not to: >> >> * reproduce the method of classification of the data used by the Licensor, >> as >> well as the database architecture; >> >> * modify or create derivative works of the database without the Licensor’s >> prior written approval; >> >> * use the database with the intention of creating a new database reproducing >> the method of classification of the Licensor and/or the database >> architecture; >> >> * manipulate and/or use the database in a way that could directly or >> indirectly compete with the Licensor; > And the database is defined as follows: > >> Database: shall mean the database called “OMICTOOLS”, including: >> >> * the data. This data is made up of software fact sheets in the scientific >> fields. These sheets may be freely modified by the users; >> >> * the presentation of data and the structure of the database; >> >> * the indexing system and the classification of data per phase (by >> technology, by application and by analysis phase); >> >> * the related documentation; >> >> * the updates; >> >> * the new versions. > Thus, I am not sure if the OMICtools IDs are part of the data or the database. > In addition, I am confused, by the fact that a) the data is said to be free, > but b) the database is not and c) the data is said to be part of the database. > > Points like the non-competition clause above are very broad and makes me > think that we should avoid OMICtools. For instance, when we document > OMICtoools ids in parallel with SciCrunch RRIDs, we foster interoperation of > course, but indirectly it helps people to switch from one to the other, which > means that it helps to "compete with the Licensor". > > In contrast, for SciCrunch, "All content of the SciCrunch Sites/Services, > except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution License." > > Sorry to come a bit late to the party with criticisms. What is your opinion > on the matter ? > > Have a nice day, > > Charles > > -- > Charles Plessy > Debian Med packaging team, > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med > Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan >
