Advertisement

Neuroinformatics

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 149–165 | Cite as

Neuroscience data and tool sharing

A legal and policy framework for neuroinformatics
  • Peter Eckersley
  • Gary F. EganEmail author
  • Erik De Schutter
  • Tang Yiyuan
  • Mirko Novak
  • Vaclav Sebesta
  • Line Matthiessen
  • Irio P. Jaaskelainen
  • Ulla Ruotsalainen
  • Andreas V. M. Herz
  • Klaus-Peter Hoffmann
  • Raphael Ritz
  • Viji Ravindranath
  • Francesco Beltrame
  • Shun-ichi Amari
  • Shiro Usui
  • Soo-Young Lee
  • Jaap van Pelt
  • Jan G. Bjaalie
  • Andrzej Wrobel
  • Fernando Mira da Silva
  • Carmen Gonzalez
  • Sten Grillner
  • Paul Verschure
  • Turgay Dalkara
  • Rob Bennett
  • David Willshaw
  • Stephen H. Koslow
  • Perry L. Miller
  • Shankar Subramaniam
  • Arthur W. Toga
Public Policy Forum

Abstract

The requirements for neuroinformatics to make a significant impact on neuroscience are not simply technical—the hardware, software, and protocols for collaborative research—they also include the legal and policy frameworks within which projects operate. This is not least because the creation of large collaborative scientific databases amplifies the complicated interactions between proprietary, for-profit R&D and public “open science.” In this paper, we draw on experiences from the field of genomics to examine some of the likely consequences of these interactions in neuroscience.

Facilitating the widespread sharing of data and tools for neuroscientific research will accelerate the development of neuroinformatics. We propose approaches to overcome the cultural and legal barriers that have slowed these developments to date. We also draw on legal strategies employed by the Free Software community, in suggesting frame-works neuroinformatics might adopt to reinforce the role of public-science databases, and propose a mechanism for identifying and allowing “open science” uses for data whilst still permitting flexible licensing for secondary commercial research.

Keywords

Free Software Open Science Application Service Provider Neuroscience Data Public Domain Database 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aldhous, P. (2000) Prospect of data sharing gives brain mappers a headache. Nature 406:445–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amari, S., Beltrame, F., Bjaalie, J., et al. (OECD Neuroinformatics Working Group) (2002). Collaborative Neuroscience: Neuroinformatics for Sharing Data and Tools. J. Integ. Neuro. 1:117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benkler, Y. (2000) Constitutional Bounds of Database Protection: The Role of Judicial Review in the Creation and Definition of Private Rights in Information. Berkeley Technology Law Journal 15:535–595.Google Scholar
  4. Burk, D. L. (2000) Intellectual Property Issues in Electronic Collaborations. In: Electronic Collaboration in Science (Koslow, S. H. and Huerta, M. F., eds.) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 15–44.Google Scholar
  5. Dam, K. (1998) Intellectual Property and the Academic Enterprise. John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper 68, University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  6. David, P. (2001) Will Building “Good Fences” Really Make “Good Neighbours” in Science? In: IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) Aspects of Internet Collaborations (Granstrand, O., Foray, D., & David, P., eds.) European Commission Research Directorate General. Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
  7. DeLong, J. B. and Froomkin, A. M. (2000) Speculative Microeconomics for Tomorrow’s Economy. First Monday 5(2) http://firstmonday.dk/ University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  8. DiBona, C., Ockman, S., and Stone, S., eds. (2000) Introduction, Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, O’Reilly & Associates, Sebastapol, CA.Google Scholar
  9. DOE-NIH Guidelines for Sharing Data and Resources (1993) Human Genome News 4(5) 4.Google Scholar
  10. Eisenberg, R. A. (2000) The Public Domain in Genomics. Proc. “A Free Information Ecology in the Digital Environment” conference, New York University School of Law Information Institute, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  11. Eisenberg, R. A. and Rai, A. K. (2001) The Public and the Private in Biopharmaceutical Research. Proc. Conference on the Public Domain, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, pp. 157–175.Google Scholar
  12. European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union (1995). Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
  13. Feist Publications vs. Rural Telephone Service Company Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. Heller, M. A. and Eisenberg, R. S. (1998) Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. Science 280: 698–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kelty, C. (2001) Free Software/Free Science. First Monday 6(12) http://firstmonday.dk/; University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  16. Koslow, S. H. (2000) Should the neuroscience community make a paradigm shift to sharing primary data? Nature Neuroscience 3:863–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Koslow, S. H. (2002) Sharing primary data: a threat or asset to discovery? Nature Reviews/Neuroscience 3:311–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuan, J. (2000) Open Source Software As Consumer Integration into Production. Unpublished, available from http://freesoftware.mit.edu/online_papers.phpGoogle Scholar
  19. Lerner, J. and Tirole, J. (2000) The simple economics of open source. NBER working paper 7600. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  20. Marshall, E. (1997) Snipping away at genome patenting. Science 277:1752–1753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Merton, R. K. (1973) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  22. Moglen, E. (2001) Free Software Matters: Enforcing the GPL, parts I & II. Linux User, August–September 2001, Cheshire, UK, pp. 66–67.Google Scholar
  23. Nature Neuroscience editorial (2000) Nature Neuroscience 3:845–846.Google Scholar
  24. OECD (1999) Final report of the OECD Megascience forum—Working Group on Biological Informatics, OECD Publications. http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M000014000/M00014759.pdf, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  25. Governing Council of the Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) (2001) Neuroimaging Databases. Science 292:5522:1673–1676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rai, A. K. (1999) Regulating Scientific Research: Intellectual Property Rights and the Norms of Science. Northwestern University Law Review 4(1): 77–152.Google Scholar
  27. Raymond, E. S. (1999) On management and the Maginot Line. In: The Cathedral and the Bazaar. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/x340.html, O’Reilly & Associates, Sebastapol, CA.Google Scholar
  28. Reichman, J. H. and Uhlir, P. F. (2001) Promoting Public Good Uses of Scientific Data: A Contractually Reconstructed Commons for Science and Innovation. Proc. Conference on the Public Domain, Duke University, Durham, NC, pp. 239–322.Google Scholar
  29. Shavell, S. and van Ypersele T. (2001) Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights. J. Law. Econ. 44(2):525–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stallman, R. M. (1992) Why Software Should be Free. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html. Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays pf Richard M. Stallman (2002), Guy, J. ed. GNU Press, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  31. Steele, S. (1996) Electronic Frontier Foundation commentary on the “Sui Generis Protection of Databases” treaty proposed for the Diplomatic Conference on Certain Copyright and Neighboring Rights Questions in Geneva. Unpublished but available at http://www.eff.org/Intellectual_property/eff_wipo_19961122.comments.Google Scholar
  32. Stewart, J. E., Mangalam, H., and Zhou, J. (2001) Open Source Software meets Gene Expression. Brief Bioinform 2:319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sunder Rajan, K. (2002) Banking (on) Biologicals: Commodification and Global Circulation of Human Genetic Material. Sarai Reader 2:277–289.Google Scholar
  34. US National Research Council (NRC) (1999) A question of balance: Private Rights and the Public Interest in Scientific and Technical Databases, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  35. White & Case, LLP (2002) Global Privacy Law: A Survey of 15 Major Jurisdictions. Global Privacy Forum. http://www.whitecase.com/report_global_privacy.pdf.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Eckersley
    • 1
  • Gary F. Egan
    • 2
    Email author
  • Erik De Schutter
    • 3
  • Tang Yiyuan
    • 4
  • Mirko Novak
    • 5
  • Vaclav Sebesta
    • 6
  • Line Matthiessen
  • Irio P. Jaaskelainen
    • 7
  • Ulla Ruotsalainen
    • 8
  • Andreas V. M. Herz
    • 9
  • Klaus-Peter Hoffmann
    • 10
  • Raphael Ritz
    • 11
  • Viji Ravindranath
    • 12
  • Francesco Beltrame
    • 13
  • Shun-ichi Amari
    • 14
  • Shiro Usui
    • 15
  • Soo-Young Lee
    • 16
  • Jaap van Pelt
    • 17
  • Jan G. Bjaalie
    • 18
  • Andrzej Wrobel
    • 19
  • Fernando Mira da Silva
    • 20
  • Carmen Gonzalez
    • 21
  • Sten Grillner
    • 22
  • Paul Verschure
    • 23
  • Turgay Dalkara
    • 24
  • Rob Bennett
    • 25
  • David Willshaw
    • 26
  • Stephen H. Koslow
    • 27
  • Perry L. Miller
    • 28
  • Shankar Subramaniam
    • 29
  • Arthur W. Toga
    • 30
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science & Software Engineering, and Intellectual Property Research Institute of AustraliaThe University of MelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Howard Florey InstituteUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  3. 3.Born Bunge FoundationUniv Antwerp-UIABelgium
  4. 4.Institute of NeuroinformaticsDalian University of TechnologyChina
  5. 5.Faculty of TransportationCzech Technical University Institute of Computer Science Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Laboratory of System ReliabilityCzech Republic
  6. 6.Institute of Computer ScienceAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicCzech Republic
  7. 7.Massachusetts General Hospital-NMR CenterHarvard Medical SchoolFinland
  8. 8.DMI/Signal Processing LaboratoryTampere University of TechnologyFinland
  9. 9.Innovationskolleg Theoretische Biologie Theorie neuronaler SystemeHumboldt-Universitaet BerlinGermany
  10. 10.Allgemeine Zoologie und NeurobiologieUniversitaet BochumGermany
  11. 11.Innovationskolleg Theoretische Biologie Theorie neuronaler SystemeHumboldt-Universitatet BerlinGermany
  12. 12.Officer on Special DutyNational Brain Research Centre ICGEB CampusIndia
  13. 13.Delegate from the Italian Ministry of University and of Scientific andTechnological ResearchItaly
  14. 14.RIKEN Brain Science InstituteLaboratory for Mathematical NeuroscienceJapan
  15. 15.Biol. & Physiol. Eng. Lab. Dept of Inf. & Comp. Sci.Toyohashi Univ. of TechnologyJapan
  16. 16.Department of BioSystems Director, Brain Science Research CenterKorea Institute of Science and TechnologyKorea
  17. 17.Netherlands Institute for Brain ResearchAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  18. 18.Neural Systems & Graphics Computing Department of Anatomy Institute of Basic Medical SciencesUniversity of OsloNorway
  19. 19.Nencki Institute of Experimental BiologyPoland
  20. 20.INESC - Grupo de Redes NeuronaisPortugal
  21. 21.Departamento de Farmacología Facultad de MedicinaUniversidad Miguel HernándezSpain
  22. 22.Nobel Institute for Neurophysiology Dep. NeuroscienceKarolinska instituteSweden
  23. 23.Institute of Neuroinformatics, ETH-UZSwitzerland
  24. 24.Institute of Neurological Sciences and PsychiatryHacettepe University and Advisory to the President Scientific & Technical Council of TurkeyTurkey
  25. 25.Board Programme Manager MRC Neurosciences & Mental Health BoardMedical Research CouncilUnited Kingdom
  26. 26.Institute for Adaptive and Neural Computation Division of InformaticsUniversity of EdinburghUnited Kingdom
  27. 27.National Institute of Mental Health, NIHOffice on NeuroinformaticsUnited States
  28. 28.Center for Medical InformaticsYale University School of MedicineUnited States
  29. 29.Chemistry and BiochemistryUC San DiegoUnited States
  30. 30.Laboratory of Neuro Imaging 4238 Reed Bldg Department of NeurologyUCLA School of MedicineUnited States

Personalised recommendations