kuang oon wrote: > Hi TimC, > The issues you raise gnaw at my heart every day. I have > consulted senior pastors > on these very issues.
With all due respect to (wo)men of the cloth, you might have done better consulting with lawyers rather than pastors on these matters. But the right lawyers, of course - like pastors, they are not all cut from the same cloth. > I have consulted respected country GPs on these > same issues. There are multi-dimensional > issues involved. What you say makes sense in the long run. It is a > timing thing. > Like in chess, before the end game the gods have put the middle game. OK, but after 20 years of DOCLE and with SNOMED-CT licensed for free use nationally, and many value-adding efforts consequently lining up behind SNOMED, one could be forgiven for thinking that it is starting to look like the end game for DOCLE. > I know these issues you raised are a stumbling block to you. > I know of your objections and your deep insights - and I meditate on them. > But we Australians are great problem solvers and we will cut through the > bull and solve them. Kuangie, if you don't want to license DOCLE for general use, it is up to you, but I (and perhaps others) will continue to raise the lack of a license each and every time you put DOCLE forward as a solution. As I said, it is a matter or principle. I regard DOCLE is a mere curiosity, but the principle of proper licensing of code sets is not - it is very important. > May I suggest that we concentrate on > 1) health informatics as if the only thing that mattered is the > computer science > 2)health interoperability as if the only thing that mattered is the > computer science That would be OK if we lived in a world in which the only thing that matters was computer science. But we don't. There are copyright laws, and lawyers, and crazy notions of intellectual property protection and so on, all of which confound the computer science unless proper attention is paid to them. Also, as someone who put time,effort and I dare say your own money into seeking patent protection for DOCLE, I think that your suggestion that we all just concentrate on the computer science is a bit disingenuous. Tim C > On 22/11/2006, at 7:06 AM, Tim Churches wrote: >> >> kuang oon wrote: >>> Docle live tree is at: http://203.219.174.94 >>> Outside it is dark. >>> I guess it is still night right now ;-)) >>> Kuangie >> >> Kuangie, >> >> That's very nifty but it says at the top of the page: >> >> "Docle Browser - (c) all rights reserved docle systems 1986-2006" >> >> All reasonable interpretations would take that assertion of all >> available rights under the Copyright Act to extend to the Docle codes >> displayed in the Docle Browser. >> >> My understanding of the Australian Copyright act, having read it several >> times over the last few years, is that anyone else is thus permitted to >> view your Docle codes in the browser but not to copy them or reproduce >> them in any way, not even by cut-and-paste into in-house reporting >> systems as David and Tony are setting up for themselves. >> >> What you need to do is furnish the Docle codes with a suitable license >> which permits others, such as David and Tony, to make use of them. >> Remember that the goal of copyright law is to prevent *any* copying of >> "works" such as your Docle codes. If, as in the case of Docle or other >> coding systems, copying is necessary to make any practical use of them, >> then you need to explicitly waive (rather than assert) certain of your >> rights under the Copyright Act, through a formal usage license. >> Otherwise your code set must remain a mere curiosity, like an exhibit >> which has been sitting for 20 years in a glass box in an obscure museum. >> >> On the occasion of Docle's 20th birthday, it is interesting to reflect >> on what might have happened had you made Docle freely available to all >> god's children at its inception. >> >> Tim C >> >>> On 21/11/2006, at 12:37 PM, kuang oon wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 21/11/2006, at 6:55 AM, David Guest wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Tony Eviston wrote: >>>>>> David Guest wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> suggestions. (Even Kuangie might be able to help me get the best >>>>>>> out of >>>>>>> those docle codes. :-) >>>>>>> >>>>> Is there a 'complete' listing of docle codes somewhere? >>>>> >>>> >>>> David & Tony et al, >>>> What you are doing resonates with me.... >>>> I have some ajax scripts, >>>> I got ruby/rails, >>>> I have a static ip >>>> I have stuff on mysql. >>>> I will put a docle live tree on the web tonight. >>>> GTG to see patients. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Kuang >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gpcg_talk mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gpcg_talk mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gpcg_talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
