Hi Erik, >For some reason, that I have not yet fully understood, previous and current leadership of openEHR has not yet dared >taking the step to skip all ND- and SA- clauses. (Like an anxious over-protective parent afraid to give their now fairly >grown teenager enough trust and freedom.)
The MB has been looking at this issue and I think generally minded to take the steps to remove the ND- and SA- clauses but we need to be absolutely clear about the implications. My understanding is that removing ND (or Public Domain) could only really be safe if we have solid Trademark protection to prevent a fork representing itself as 'official openEHR'. This was the approach taken by FHIR, I believe that for some technical reason, previous attempts to secure US trademarking was unsuccessful, and course, will cost a few thousand euros to achieve. Silje, Heather and myself looked at removing -SA in connection with better understanding the copyright requirements for forks / moves of CKM archetypes. There were some concerns that removing -SA might actually make free movement of archetypes between national repos more difficult, particularly if national govts start to fork and apply more restrictive licences. This is not necessarily a blocker but we do need to think through the implications. I will raise this at the MB meeting this week wth the suggestion that we set up a small working group with reps from Software, Clinical and Specs group Program leads to look at the options and report back. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 office +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: ianmcnicoll email: [email protected] twitter: @ianmcnicoll Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation [email protected] Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd. Director, HANDIHealth CIC Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL On 5 September 2015 at 09:44, "Gerard Freriks (privé)" <[email protected]> wrote: > That is correct. > > Some NEN.CEN standards are free to obtain in the Netherlands because of a > contract between the government and the SDO. > Recently the ISO policy is to publish all informative parts of the > standard but not the normative parts. > > Experts nominated by countries have a larger access to full stadard in the > context of standards creation/maintenance. > > It is my opinion that the SDO’s need an other business model such that > standards are made available for free. > > > Gerard Freriks > +31 620347088 > [email protected] > > On 4 sep. 2015, at 21:58, Diego Boscá <[email protected]> wrote: > > There are free ISO specifications, like schematron and a handful more. > > http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/ > > You can even ask for an ISO norm to be free. In fact asked for ISO 13606 > to be free, but received no answer. > On 04-09-15 19:55, Ian McNicoll wrote: > >> I am happy to debate the relevant merits of the ISO vs. open-source >> approaches recognising >> > The one does not exclude the other, I would say. > > But on second thought, does ISO prohibit giving a free license, or > publishing the specs for free? > I am not sure about that. > I am sure they prohibit publishing their document. > > As is with AOM1.4, it is published as ISO's version by ISO (as part of > ISO13606) and it is published as OpenEHR's version by OpenEHR , so that > can be done. > That both contain the same information. > > It is a bit Kafkaesk, but that is normal when bureaucrats get involved. > > > Bert > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
