[open-science] github/R stack for the nomadic researcher - permanence?

Thu Apr 12 04:24:10 UTC 2012

Mat,
Many thanks for this - we are wrestling with science data as part of the
EU's Horizon2020 framework and I shall use your mail as an example. It's a
great example (unfortunately) of what happens when the law strikes. There
is no way round laws except by getting them changed.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Matthew Todd <matthew.todd at sydney.edu.au>wrote:

> All,
>
> This point may have been made already in the cascade of mails (no longer
> grouped?) on this subject, but we're dealing with this issue of data for
> our open projects right now.
>
> All our primary data on the schisto and drug discovery projects are shared
> through Labtrove's electronic lab notebook. While we post new experiments
> every day (i.e. the content changes) *we are required by law to keep the
> data essentially forever*. This is because the data involve experimental
> science, and as part of safety regulations we are required to keep lab
> books for 70 years after the completion of the relevant procedure (i.e.
> forever). I would urge any open scientist to look into this - their
> university/institution/country probably has similar requirements. Ours come
> from New South Wales state law. I can forward the relevant clause if anyone
> desperately wants to see it.
>

I think my colleagues in Horizon2020 would be very keen to see this. If it
is generally applicable and if it likely to be invoked then it puts a huge
burden on the institution.

>
> Now I'm in the middle of talking with Australian data guys (at NeCTAR -
> the cloud data service specifically designed for things like this) about
> permanent backup of our data. If for some reason NeCTAR goes under, or we
> need to pay NeCTAR and cannot, then it would be my responsibility to ensure
> my University backs up the data. There aren't clear routes for this, so I
> have no clear answers. It's important because if I don't keep the data I
> could be liable years down the track.
>
> If I tell my University adminstrators that I am using a commercial service
> to back up my data (data which have arisen from government-funded research)
> they will tell me that that is not good enough, and will ask me what
> happens if the company I am using goes bust in 30 years' time. That the
> University has no viable alternative won't be a productive argument - I
> will be told to continue using paper lab books until there is a better
> alternative. Hence for me it's important that the data I generate are
> stored in some "official" system, meaning a composite of national and
> library archives.
>
>
The pharma companies have spent zillions on this sort of problem. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_21_CFR_Part_11 which is about drug
submissions. That's what the change to electronic does for you.

> I flag this up just because I've had to look fairly far into this because
> of the nature of the open, paperless data we're generating. I know a
> commercial service will not be looked upon kindly. Clearly (I hasten to
> add) I don't necessarily agree with this. Clearly commercial services (such
> as Mark's wonderful Figshare) are useful for sharing nimbly and
> effectively, and other things we're using for our open science projects
> (like G+ and Twitter) are not archived but are still great and useful in a
> way that an archive is not. But *permanence of the repository use to house
> the raw data* (i.e. the electronic lab notebook needed for open science)
> and *contingency plans for the repository's failure* need to be in place
> for us to have a general solution that could gain traction. My feeling is
> that data arising from University-generated research needs to be managed by
> the University through support of something like a national service. That's
> slowly happening in Australia right now, and I hope elsewhere.
>
> ...unless other services are able to guarantee their existence in 70
> years' time, in which case: problem solved.
>
> I think only a national library can guarantee this. In the UK I would go
to the British Library. I can ask today but I doubt they have a ready made
solution.

> Cheers,
>
> Mat
>
>
> --
> MATTHEW TODD | Senior Lecturer and Honours Coordinator
> School of Chemistry | Faculty of Science
>
> THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY
> Rm 519, F11 | The University of Sydney | NSW | 2006
> T +61 2 9351 2180  | F +61 2 9351 3329  | M +61 415 274104
> E matthew.todd at sydney.edu.au  | W
> http://sydney.edu.au/science/chemistry/research/todd.html
>
> CRICOS 00026A
> This email plus any attachments to it are confidential. Any unauthorised
> use is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please
> delete it and any attachments.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>
>

-- 
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/20120412/3e598af2/attachment-0001.html>