Something that has become clear in CIMI, and will affect openEHR, 13606
and most likely any archetype developer is that acknowledgements of 3rd
party copyrights and trademarks need to be made. The most obvious common
one is likely to be for SNOMED CT codes in archetype bindings (Stan Huff
at Intermountain is still working on whether such acknowledgements are
needed for LOINC codes). However, it could be for anything, e.g. rights
to use a scale like Barthel or Waterlow.
At the moment there is no dedicated place in the model for this
particular meta-data. It could just go in 'other_details' but I suspect
that we need to be more precise than that. Consider for example, the
openEHR Barthel scale archetype - it currently carries this text in the
'Use' section:
Note:
The Maryland State Medical Society holds the copyright for the
Barthel Index. It may be used freely for non-commercial purposes
with the following citation:
Mahoney FI, Barthel D. ?Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index.?
Maryland State Med Journal 1965;14:56-61. Used with permission.
Permission is required to modify the Barthel Index or to use it for
commercial purposes.
This seems less than optimal, and is certainly not going to be reliably
tool-separable from the main 'Use' content, since the word 'Note:' and
the placement of this text are purely local choices.
There is another issue here. The acknowledgement text actually included
in the archetype needs to be minimal, and as far as legally possible not
contain volatile elements that can change. Therefore, I think the
general approach needs to be as is typically done with open source
licences: not including the whole text, but including a reliable URL to
the licence text either from the issuer (e.g. Creative Commons CC-BY
page) or an agreement between the publisher and the licensor (e.g.
between IHTSDO and CIMI for the use of SNOMED CT, and details of that use).
I have updated the meta-data page on the wiki
<http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/ADL/Knowledge+Artefact+Meta-data>to
indicate what I think is the requirement - see end of the main table.
I am increasingly of the feeling that we need to act on this soon.
- thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20141113/dac592df/attachment.html>
