Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
This chapter outlines some of the principal ways United States Intellectual Property Law affects the sharing of digital scholarly objects, particularly for those who wish to practice reproducible computational science or Open Science. The sharing of the research manuscript, and the data and code that are associated with the manuscript, can be subject to copyright and software is also potentially subject to patenting. Both of these aspects of Intellectual Property must be confronted by researchers for each of the these digital scholarly objects: the research article; the data; and the code. Recommendations are made to maximize the downstream reuse utility of each of these objects. Finally, this chapter proposes new structures to manage Intellectual Property to accelerate scientific discovery.
Donoho, D., & Buckheit, J. (1995). WaveLab and reproducible research. Stanford Department of Statistics Technical Report.
Donoho, D., Stodden, V., & Tsaig, Y. (2007). About sparseLab. Available at: http://www.stanford.edu/~vcs/papers/AboutSparseLab.pdf.
Gentleman, R., & Temple Lang, D. (2004). Statistical analyses and reproducible research. Available at: http://biostats.bepress.com/bioconductor/paper2/.
King, G. (1995). Replication, replication. Political Science and Politics, 28, 443–499.
Merton, R. K. (1973). The normative structure of science. In R. K. Merton (Ed.), The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Stodden, V. (2009a). Enabling reproducible research: Licensing for scientific innovation (pp. 1–25). Law and Policy: International Journal of Communications.
Stodden, V. (2009b). The legal framework for reproducible research in the sciences: Licensing and copyright. IEEE Computing in Science and Engineering, 11(1), 35–40. CrossRef
Stodden, V. (2010). The scientific method in practice: Reproducibility in the computational sciences. MIT Sloan Research Paper No. 4773-10. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1550193.
Stodden, V., et al. (2011). Rules for Growth: Promoting Innovation and Growth Through Legal Reform. Yale Law and Economics Research Paper No. 426, Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 410, UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 1757982. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1757982 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1757982..
Stodden, V., & Reich, I. (2011). Software patents as a barrier to scientific transparency: An unexpected consequence of bayh-dole. SSRN Working Paper. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2149717.
Stodden, V., Hurlin, C., & Perignon, C. (2012). RunMyCode.Org: A novel dissemination and collaboration platform for executing published computational results. SSRN Electronic Journal. Available at: http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=2147710.
Trivers, R. (2012). Fraud, disclosure, and degrees of freedom in science. Psychology Today. Available at: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-folly-fools/201205/fraud-disclosure-and-degrees-freedom-in-science.
- Intellectual Property and Computational Science
in-adhesives, MKVS, Hellmich GmbH/© Hellmich GmbH, Zühlke/© Zühlke