{
  "version": "https://jsonfeed.org/version/1.1",
  "title": "chem-bla-ics",
  "description": "Chemblaics (pronounced chem-bla-ics) is the science that uses open science and computers to solve problems in chemistry, biochemistry and related fields.",
  "home_page_url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/",
  "feed_url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2008/05/10/john-wilbanks-replies-to.json",
  "icon": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/assets/images/chem-bla-ics_logo.png",
  "language": "en",
  "authors": [
    {
      "name": "Egon Willighagen",
      "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286",
      "_orcid": "0000-0001-7542-0286"
    }
  ],
  "items": [

    {
      "id": "https://doi.org/10.59350/1x0d5-we437",
      "url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2008/05/10/john-wilbanks-replies-to.html",
      "title": "John Wilbanks replies to the ChemSpider/OpenData discussion",
      "content_html": "<p>Not long after I posted my view on things, <a href=\"http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/wilbanks/2008/05/10/chemspider-good-intentions-and-the-fog-of-licensing\">John posted his reply</a>\non the ChemSpider/OpenData discussion. His comment was merely to illustrate an internal advice to some organization, which got accidentally leaked. Anyway, a must read,\n<a href=\"http://sciencecommons.org/projects/publishing/open-access-data-protocol/\">with two</a>\n<a href=\"http://www.opendatacommons.org/odc-public-domain-dedication-and-licence/\">good links</a> to further reading on open data licensing.</p>\n\n<p>His blog mentions the concept of <em>public domain</em>, where data might be dumped, but I always understood that the US public domain concept is different from that of\nmainland-EU, German law in particular. This second ‘good link’ points to a license which formalizes this ‘public domain’ idea. And reading it, I realize that I\nhave read it before. But I had completely forgot about it.</p>\n\n<p>A quick reread of these two links, tells me that it indeed is BSD-versus-GPL all over again; with the <a href=\"http://sciencecommons.org/\">Science Commons</a>\nlicense on the BSD side, and CC-BY-SA at the GPL side. The first surely makes the life easier of aggregators who wish to combine licenses. Can’t argue with that.</p>\n\n<p>Then again… what’s wrong with a bit of viral character in the license? What’s wrong with the statement that ‘you may use my data, if I may use your aggregated\ndata with the same license’? That limits your what you practically can do, but does not limit your freedoms.</p>",
      "summary": "Not long after I posted my view on things, John posted his reply on the ChemSpider/OpenData discussion. His comment was merely to illustrate an internal advice to some organization, which got accidentally leaked. Anyway, a must read, with two good links to further reading on open data licensing.",
      
      "date_published": "2008-05-10T00:00:00+00:00",
      "date_modified": "2008-05-10T00:00:00+00:00",
      "tags": ["chemspider","opendata","copyright"],
      
      
      "_citations": [
        
          
          
            { "url": "https://doi.org/10.22323/2.07020304", "doi": "10.22323/2.07020304"
            , "cito":
              
              
                [ 
                  "disagreesWith"
                  
                 ]
               }
            
          
        ],
      
      
      
      
        "authors": [ { "name": "Egon Willighagen", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286" } ]
      
    }

  ]
}