Le Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 10:11:15AM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
>
> I will wait a bit for other comments, and then re-contact UniProt as Ian
> suggested.
Dear all,
I re-contacted UniProt, and they proposed to add a clarification on their
license page, in line with what I proposed, that a coup
Le Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:47:25PM -0700, Don Armstrong a écrit :
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > UniProt.org is registered in the US. Is there any reason to believe
> > this particular work is tainted by EU database rights?
>
> UniProt is part of EMBL, which is in the EU. That sa
On Wed, 04 Apr 2012, Steve Langasek wrote:
> UniProt.org is registered in the US. Is there any reason to believe
> this particular work is tainted by EU database rights?
UniProt is part of EMBL, which is in the EU. That said, if the purpose
is to get protein sequences for examples, I don't know wh
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:13:03AM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> I keep sticking out my head over and over again [e.g. 1, recently on R
> list] asking the same questions trying to clear up my understanding of
> data-copyrightability and licensing issues.
> yesterday I have found a nice summar
I keep sticking out my head over and over again [e.g. 1, recently on R
list] asking the same questions trying to clear up my understanding of
data-copyrightability and licensing issues.
yesterday I have found a nice summary [2] which I think might clarify
situation here as well a bit. From what I
On Monday, April 02, 2012 06:54:32 PM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:00:11PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Nevertheless, facts such as protein sequences are not copyrightable.
> > This is somewhat confirmed by the UniProt consortium itself on their
> > website (http://www.unipr
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:00:11PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> Nevertheless, facts such as protein sequences are not copyrightable. This is
> somewhat confirmed by the UniProt consortium itself on their website
> (http://www.uniprot.org/help/license), and my conclusion is that, in isolation
Charles Plessy writes ("Non-copyrightable work with non-free license."):
> in at least two of my packages, bioperl and emboss, the test suite contains
> protein sequence files from the UniProt database, which is distributed under
> the non-free CC Attribution-NoDerivs license.
Dear all,
in at least two of my packages, bioperl and emboss, the test suite contains
protein sequence files from the UniProt database, which is distributed under
the non-free CC Attribution-NoDerivs license. Through a private discussion I
had with their helpdesk, my understanding of their positi
9 matches
Mail list logo
