> (i) if the parameters are not just a few numbers derived from the database, > but are a significant part of the database (like a list of all interatomic > distances in the database) > (ii) if part of the study was directly paid by the CCDC
> But if neither (i) or (ii) are true, i.e. there are just a few parameters > derived from a bought copy of the database, then this is a clear abuse of the > data. What next ? Will we have to pay royalties every time a new structure is > solved using some information mined from the database ??? > I understand the will to protect copying raw data from the database, but NOT > derived information. This is the kind of abuse of intellectual property that > is damaging to innovation and algorithms improvement, disregarding the > commercial/open-source nature of the software. I'm not even sure it's legal > to pretend 'owning' such parameters, unless we are in case (i) or (ii). Neither (i) nor (ii) apply in this case. Nevertheless, according to Dr. Hofmann, the CCDC claims a right on all information/data which have been derived from the CSD database in the database licensing conditions. Perhaps we (Crystal Impact) should claim a right on all crystal structures which have been solved using Endeavour...... ;-)) Holger *************************************** Dr. Holger Putz Crystal Impact Dr. K. Brandenburg & Dr. H. Putz GbR Postfach 12 51 53002 Bonn Germany Tel . : +49-228-9813643 Fax : +49-228-9813644 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.crystalimpact.com ***************************************
