Hi Karsten,
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 22:11:07 +0200, Karsten Hilbert <karsten.hilb...@gmx.net>
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:37:18PM +0530, Faheem Mitha wrote:
>
>> It is not really a big
>> deal either way, but if I had some definite information
>
> There is no definite information to be had because it is
> exactly that: different opinion in different places.
>
> And that's mostly due to people being either stupid or
> greedy. Or both. (Or not-yet-educated on the issue in which
> case providing information so they can decide on a license
> *sometimes* works.)
Thank you for your replies. I only just saw them, because I am not
actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists, and either read
replies if they are CCed to me, or read them via gmane (as I am doing
now) possibly some time after they have been posted. I don't always
remember to say "CC me please" in my posts, and people don't always CC
me if I do. Still, I wish there was a way to make a permanent sticky
thing for my posts to mailing lists (which 99% of the time I am not
subscribed to) saying "CC me please". I guess if I was more techy than
I am, I would have a setup where my signature to mailing lists
included a "CC please".
Anyway, from what you and others are saying there is no definite
general legal answer about whether biological data can be
proprietary. This is not welcome news, but is unsurprising. I hope
these issues will be clarified eventually, so that biological data can
universally be considered public domain or similar.
If you or anyone else know of any ongoing work to clarify this issue,
can you link to it? Thanks.
Regards, Faheem
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnl4gou9.b95.fah...@chrestomanci.home.earth
