[open-science] Royal Society Report Submission

[Peter Murray-Rust]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Jenny Molloy <jenny.molloy at okfn.org> wrote:

> Dear All
>
> The drafting session yesterday evening yielded a useful outline which can
> now be fleshed out and commented on. Please do take a look at
> http://okfnpad.org/sciencewg-RS-SAPE and add your comments/ideas.
>
> It is currently in note form and essentially documents our discussion last
> night, so if anybody wants to edit points into sentences and paragraphs that
> would be very useful! We will review again on 30th July to assess how much
> work needs to be done before submission prior to 5th August.
>
> Thanks a lot for everyone's help thus far :)
>
> Jenny
>
>
> Thanks very much Jenny and everyone for an excellent draft. I don't have
major comments (I tend to work in disciplines without social aspects
(crystallography, chemistry, software). I think 20 years is too long - it's
quite possible that the primary author could be dead and you get the same
paralysis as in copyright (we have examples of 120+ year old interlibrary
loans which couldn't be released because the library couldn't be sure that
all the authors were dead. And it gives a blanket policy. Thus Imperial
College Chemistry have refused to allow ANY chemistry theses to be visible
for 5 years - there is a serious danger people might read them and find out
what people were doing. If we say "20 years" it becomes easy to legitimize
"this is only 5 years" which - IMO is unacceptable and stems from laziness
and possessiveness rather than any objective measure.

Very sorry I coun't make it and many thanks to those in different timezeones
- there is a real feeling of community.


-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20110719/e283a29e/attachment-0001.html>