On Jun 15 2007, Sanford Dickert wrote:
Peter - thanks for the link. Will follow up. We did not get anything
formal, we kept getting the run around.
But question: "Supporting Information, either in whole or in part" - is
this suggesting that the name of the chemical or the specs (i.e. boiling
point, melting point) or other aspects (IUPAC number) are also
copyrighted?
The answer is usually - "it hasn't yet been tested in court". I hold this
is not copyrightable. But the University of Cambridge has already been cut
off by ACS for (perfectly legal) downloaded of multiple copies of articles
- they are quite capable of doing it for machine extraction of what they
regard as copyright.
On 15 Jun 2007 06:17:24 +0100, Dr P. Murray-Rust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15 2007, Prof. Sanford Dickert wrote:
>All -
>
> Quick question: I have been trying to investigate the IP issues
> regarding publishing spectra - and my students and I have found little
> to tell us there is a problem. We even contacted the ACS and they said
> there was no issue.
The releavent policy is contained in pages such as:
http://pubs3.acs.org/acs/journals/supporting_information.page?in_manuscript=jo0706574
which contains the phrase
Electronic Supporting Information files are available without a
subscription to ACS Web Editions. All files are copyrighted by the
American Chemical Society. Files may be downloaded for personal use;
users are not permitted to reproduce, republish, redistribute, or resell
any Supporting Information, either in whole or in part, in either
machine-readable form or any other form. For permission to reproduce
this material, contact the ACS Copyright Office by e-mail at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or by fax at 202-776-8112.
The ACS has insisted in the past that we sign a copyright transfer form
for all supporting information. I have seen no evidence the policy has
changed but if it has we'd be delighted to know. If you have a formal
communication from them on this issue please reproduce it here as it may
then allow us to change strategy.
>
> Now, I am confused - since I *know* that their is an issue, but we
> could not find the right person to discuss this with.
>
> Does anyone here have a suggestion on where to look? Any help is
> greatly appreciated.
>
>Sanford
>
>On 6/14/07, Christoph Steinbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Tobias Kind wrote:
>> > Hi Christoph, I did not argue about curation of the NMRShiftDB, I
>> > think the NMRShiftDB
>> is
>> > a great thing and I am happy that somebody started and developed it.
>>
>> I was aware of that but I just could not resist to make my (pointless)
>> point :-)
>>
>> > I was also very happy that I did not comment on the accusations by
>> > Wolfgang Robien, because a nice BlogWar was developing afterwards.
>> > http://nmrpredict.orc.univie.ac.at/csearchlite/hallofshame.html
>> > http://acdlabs.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/05/update_robien_o.html
>>
>> Same here - although I will finally have to summarize things and
comment.
>>
>> > You could also argue; how could Wolfgang perform such a statistics
>> > in the first place? Because he could freely download the data :-)
>> > In this way he morphed into an open data spectral curator
>> > in the second place, which was very interesting to watch.
>>
>> That's why I can't get that smile out of my face when I read the
>> respective blog fight. I take the reports about errors very
>> seriously, but not the ones about our model. That was exactly the
>> moderately original point in our grant proposal for NMRShiftDB - can
>> we transfer the ideas of open source development to communally
>> developed databases. It did not work until Wolfgang jumped in :-) I
>> will blog about this.
>>
>>
>> > What could have happen in NMR research if Wolfgang Robien would
>> > have opened his NMR database with 80,000 carbon NMR spectra and
>> > structures in 1993? We will never know. Maybe we would now talk
>> > about 2D NMR spectra prediction errors instead of talking about 1D
>> > NMR
errors
>> > like: Oh my algorithm is 0.19 ppm better than yours.
>> > Maybe everybody would use comprehensive algorithms like SENECA or
>> StrucEluc?
>> > Such algorithms are innovative and exciting! And instead of 12
>> publications
>> > which mention CSearch in the abstract; or 70 at all; there would be
700
>> > publications which made use of CSearch and Wolfgangs algorithms and
>> > databases?
>>
>> Very well said. I have nothing to add here :-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> --
>> PD Dr. Christoph Steinbeck ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>> Lecturer in Chemoinformatics
>> Univ. Tuebingen, WSI-RA, Sand 1, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany
>> Phone: (+49/0) 7071-29-78978 Fax: (+49/0) 7071-29-5091
>>
>> What is man but that lofty spirit - that sense of enterprise.
>> ... Kirk, "I, Mudd," stardate 4513.3..
>> _______________________________________________
>> Blue-obelisk mailing list
>> Blue-obelisk@hardly.cubic.uni-koeln.de
>> http://hardly.cubic.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/blue-obelisk
>>
>
--
Peter Murray-Rust
Unilever Centre for Molecular Informatics
Chemistry Department, Cambridge University
Lensfield Road, CAMBRIDGE, CB2 1EW, UK
Tel: +44-1223-763069 Fax: +44 1223 763076
--
Peter Murray-Rust
Unilever Centre for Molecular Informatics
Chemistry Department, Cambridge University
Lensfield Road, CAMBRIDGE, CB2 1EW, UK
Tel: +44-1223-763069 Fax: +44 1223 763076
_______________________________________________
Blue-obelisk mailing list
Blue-obelisk@hardly.cubic.uni-koeln.de
http://hardly.cubic.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/blue-obelisk
