Hi Diego, I did wonder about the idea of repository-level attribution but in practice the archetypes will often be disconnected and shared in local repositories etc, so I suspect we are stuck with attribution for each archetype.
I have looked at Thomas's proposal on the wiki and now think that is probably the best answer. It keeps 'use' and 'references' for their original intention and might make it easier to automate the import of boilerplate term of use etc. e.g. The repository manager could check for SNOMED CT and LOINC bindings on upload and offer to add the requisite text. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 office +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: ianmcnicoll email: ian at freshehr.com twitter: @ianmcnicoll Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Director, openEHR Foundation Director, HANDIHealth CIC Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL On 13 November 2014 09:44, Diego Bosc? <yampeku at gmail.com> wrote: > If the 3rd party attribution will be always the same, should not be > stored in the repository or make that it is somewhat assumed for > archetypes in a given domain instead of repeating it on each > archetype? > And as David says, a new metadata attribute was included to deal with > this if still it is needed to be put (the barthel scale use case) > > 2014-11-13 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ian McNicoll <ian.mcnicoll at > oceaninformatics.com>: >> So we all would probably benefit from creating some copy and paste >> examples for common 3rd party attribution that can be easily >> incorporated into archetypes / resources. >> >> Ian >> Dr Ian McNicoll >> office +44 (0)1536 414 994 >> fax +44 (0)1536 516317 >> mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 >> skype ianmcnicoll >> ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com >> >> Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK >> Director openEHR Foundation www.openehr.org/knowledge >> Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL >> SCIMP Working Group, NHS Scotland >> BCS Primary Health Care www.phcsg.org >> >> >> On 13 November 2014 09:24, Grahame Grieve >> <grahame at healthintersections.com.au> wrote: >>> you do not need to pay, but the licensing requirements are quite specific >>> about what kind of attribution is required. >>> >>> Grahame >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Stefan Sauermann >>> <sauermann at technikum-wien.at> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello! >>>> We are using LOINC in Austria for coding lab results on a national scale. >>>> As far as I know nobody needs to pay anything to Regenstrief to do so. >>>> >>>> I am not aware of any "must mention Regenstrief" requirements, but I may >>>> miss something. >>>> Greetings from Vienna, >>>> Stefan >>>> >>>> Stefan Sauermann >>>> >>>> Program Director >>>> Biomedical Engineering Sciences (Master) >>>> >>>> University of Applied Sciences Technikum Wien >>>> Hoechstaedtplatz 5, 1200 Vienna, Austria >>>> P: +43 1 333 40 77 - 988 >>>> M: +43 664 6192555 >>>> E: stefan.sauermann at technikum-wien.at >>>> >>>> I: www.technikum-wien.at/mbe >>>> I: www.technikum-wien.at/ibmt >>>> I: www.healthy-interoperability.at >>>> >>>> Am 13.11.2014 10:07, schrieb Grahame Grieve: >>>> >>>> my advice from LOINC/regenstrief is that it does apply >>>> >>>> Grahame >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Thomas Beale >>>> <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 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 >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> openEHR-clinical mailing list >>>>> openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org >>>>> >>>>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ----- >>>> http://www.healthintersections.com.au / grahame at >>>> healthintersections.com.au >>>> / +61 411 867 065 >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> openEHR-clinical mailing list >>>> openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org >>>> >>>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ----- >>> http://www.healthintersections.com.au / grahame at >>> healthintersections.com.au / >>> +61 411 867 065 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> openEHR-technical mailing list >>> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org >>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
