John Pople not John People. --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Tue, Jul 7, 2020, 7:39 AM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: > Carnegie Mellon's intellectual property policy was described in a ~50 page > summary document when I worked there. But it was apparently more > complicated than that. I had to testify in Federal Court regarding > software that had been developed by chemistry professor and Nobel Laureate > John People and his students. A company named Gaussian Inc was selling the > software and one of my tasks was to keep the version made available by the > Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center current. PSC is jointly operated by CMU > and Pitt and it makes supercomputers and software available to > researchers. The simplified understanding was that any artifact created by > CMU researchers could be sold commercially but that the University could > not be charged for its use. When I asked for Gaussian 94 (a new version > was released every two years) the company stalled for weeks and eventually > said we had to buy it. To shorten the story, after months of litigation > and just before the judge was to issue his ruling, an out-of-court > settlement was reached which was confidential. IP is a complex area. > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020, 7:05 AM ∄ uǝlƃ <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Continuing down the open access thread and the ethics of Schwartz' JSTOR >> theft, libgen, and sci-hub: >> >> Retractions and controversies over coronavirus research show that the >> process of science is working as it should >> >> https://theconversation.com/retractions-and-controversies-over-coronavirus-research-show-that-the-process-of-science-is-working-as-it-should-140326 >> >> From the article: "The database provided by the tiny company Surgisphere >> – whose website is no longer accessible – was unavailable during peer >> review of the paper or to scientists and the public afterwards, preventing >> anyone from evaluating the data." >> >> The point I made in response to EricS's worry that emphasizing paper >> consumption over book consumption was that the paper publishing process is >> more agile and, I argue, can stick more closely to the referent(s). With >> that agility comes some of the criticisms of Science™ (as well-expressed by >> Dave recently). To my mind, those criticisms target the wrong thing. >> They're failures of us to understand that there is no unified scientific >> method [†] and, along with *openness* comes an understanding that the whole >> process is messy and intensely social. I think it was Randy Burge who used >> to repeat a mantra like "Not being right, but getting it right." That >> journals (as well as newspapers) don't *require* open source and open data >> at the outset boggles me. >> >> Coincidentally, this popped up in my queue the other day: >> >> Let's talk about why people are moving left.... >> https://youtu.be/2g0qUxgwHmo >> >> Ed's story about authors seeing very little compensation for their work, >> Nick's plea for a way to harvest the minds of non-academics, the ethics of >> Schwartz' theft, are all *old* issues targeting the same problems with late >> stage capitalism now being targeted by BLM and antifa. Perhaps the >> incentive and motive systems are the causes; and outcomes like libgen are >> the symptoms. >> >> >> [†] I'm currently (slowly, as usual) reading a nice little book called >> "Ignorance" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13574594-ignorance that >> makes this point nicely. I put the book down in disgust when he started >> yapping about quantum mechanics. Why does everyone always do that even if >> they admit upfront they don't know what they're talking about? [sigh] >> Anyway, I got over it and have started again. >> >> On 7/7/20 4:59 AM, Edward Angel wrote: >> > I have to negotiate the terms with the university, I can, however, make >> anything I develop open source. It took a while for universities to agree >> that that that decision is totally up to the faculty member. >> -- >> ☣ uǝlƃ >> >> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> >> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
