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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aldhous, P. (2000) Prospect of data sharing gives brain mappers a headache. Nature 406:445–446.
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.
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.
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.
Dam, K. (1998) Intellectual Property and the Academic Enterprise. John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper 68, University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, IL.
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.
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.
DiBona, C., Ockman, S., and Stone, S., eds. (2000) Introduction, Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, O’Reilly & Associates, Sebastapol, CA.
DOE-NIH Guidelines for Sharing Data and Resources (1993) Human Genome News 4(5) 4.
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.
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.
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.
Feist Publications vs. Rural Telephone Service Company Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 1991.
Heller, M. A. and Eisenberg, R. S. (1998) Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. Science 280: 698–701.
Kelty, C. (2001) Free Software/Free Science. First Monday 6(12) http://firstmonday.dk/; University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Koslow, S. H. (2000) Should the neuroscience community make a paradigm shift to sharing primary data? Nature Neuroscience 3:863–865.
Koslow, S. H. (2002) Sharing primary data: a threat or asset to discovery? Nature Reviews/Neuroscience 3:311–313.
Kuan, J. (2000) Open Source Software As Consumer Integration into Production. Unpublished, available from http://freesoftware.mit.edu/online_papers.php
Lerner, J. and Tirole, J. (2000) The simple economics of open source. NBER working paper 7600. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Marshall, E. (1997) Snipping away at genome patenting. Science 277:1752–1753.
Merton, R. K. (1973) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.
Moglen, E. (2001) Free Software Matters: Enforcing the GPL, parts I & II. Linux User, August–September 2001, Cheshire, UK, pp. 66–67.
Nature Neuroscience editorial (2000) Nature Neuroscience 3:845–846.
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.
Governing Council of the Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) (2001) Neuroimaging Databases. Science 292:5522:1673–1676.
Rai, A. K. (1999) Regulating Scientific Research: Intellectual Property Rights and the Norms of Science. Northwestern University Law Review 4(1): 77–152.
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.
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.
Shavell, S. and van Ypersele T. (2001) Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights. J. Law. Econ. 44(2):525–548.
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.
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.
Stewart, J. E., Mangalam, H., and Zhou, J. (2001) Open Source Software meets Gene Expression. Brief Bioinform 2:319–328.
Sunder Rajan, K. (2002) Banking (on) Biologicals: Commodification and Global Circulation of Human Genetic Material. Sarai Reader 2:277–289.
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.
White & Case, LLP (2002) Global Privacy Law: A Survey of 15 Major Jurisdictions. Global Privacy Forum. http://www.whitecase.com/report_global_privacy.pdf.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Eckersley’s work on this project is supported by IPRIA funding from IP Australia.
For the institutional affiliations of the other co-authors and members of the OECD working group on neuroinformatics, please see the end of this paper.
Scientific Officer European Commission DG Research B-II-03 - Neurosciences
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Eckersley, P., Egan, G.F., De Schutter, E. et al. Neuroscience data and tool sharing. Neuroinform 1, 149–165 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12021-003-0002-1
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12021-003-0002-1