http://mndoci.disqus.com/At the interface of science and computingenTue, 13 May 2008 10:16:27 -0000http://mndoci.com/2008/05/11/the-open-data-licensing-issue/#comment-455819<p>I think you can guess where I stand on this. I believe that all data in journals, including (especially?) supplementary material. The ACS has serious issues with their permissions. There is a treasure trove of information out there and it would be freely minable (structures, IC50's, etc)</p>mndociTue, 13 May 2008 10:16:27 -0000http://mndoci.com/2008/05/11/the-open-data-licensing-issue/#comment-453652<p>Deepak...based on your comments "The public domain is the natural place for raw scientific data. That’s where it belongs and always has been. " Yes, I agree. Where do you stand on our discussions to get agreement from ACS that we should be able to extract data from the Supplementary Data on ACS Journals. I have been trying to get an answer from ACS about CIF files for 7 months. See: <a href="http://www.chemspider.com/blog/why-we-cant-publish-scraped-crystaleye-data-yetand-science-commons-declare-a-protocol-for-implementing-open-access-data.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.chemspider.com/blog/why-we-cant-publish-scraped-crystaleye-data-yetand-science-commons-declare-a-protocol-for-implementing-open-access-data.html">http://www.chemspider.com/b...</a><br>Relative to a discussion about "Content" and ChemSpider I welcome your thoughts...</p>ChemSpidermanMon, 12 May 2008 20:13:28 -0000