Archetype authoring attribution

Sam Heard sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com
Thu Mar 22 18:21:57 EDT 2012


Hi David

 

As the aim for all is interoperability of these things, I would hope that
the information would be two way. I would suggest getting the new experts to
comment on CKM and then derive a 13606 archetype (this is described in the
13606 standard). I would like that to be a future part of CKM but understand
this may seem a little too controlling.

 

If we start creating clinical content specifications in lots of places it
will not really assist medicine a great deal. We estimate that it is costing
health care dearly to do this again, again and again. Particularly when
providers are interested in quality and sharing information.

 

That said, I would attribute the work to openEHR, the original authors,
contributors and any new expert inputs. The license is to openEHR so I guess
it is openEHR that needs attributing if you want to stay with the legal
requirement. The SA does mean that you have to share the derived work under
a similar license, something that some have been worried about. I am
interested in your views on this.

 

Cheers, Sam

 

From: openehr-technical-bounces at lists.openehr.org
[mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at lists.openehr.org] On Behalf Of David
Moner
Sent: Thursday, 22 March 2012 9:33 PM
To: OpenEHR clinical discussions; OpenEHR technical discussions
Subject: Archetype authoring attribution

 




Hello,

 

Back again with the licensing topic of archetypes, with a real use case.

 

We have been asked to help in creating a set of 13606 archetypes for breast
and prostate cancer. Although they will probably incorporate some new
requirements, the main source will be some of the openEHR archetypes
available at the CKM.

Assuming that the have adopted a CC-BY(-SA) license (I cannot recall which
is the state of that discussion), the doubts are the following:

 

- Converting the archetype to a new reference model is considered as a
derivation? Or the openEHR archetype is considered just as a reference
material as could be any textbook or paper?

- The author of the new archetype has to be the one of the openEHR archetype
(Ian McNicoll btw) or the person who in fact creates the new RM-based
archetype?

 

The underlying question here that should be clarified is to define which is
the extension of the concept "derived work".

 

David

 

-- 
David Moner Cano
Grupo de Informática Biomédica - IBIME
Instituto ITACA
http://www.ibime.upv.es

Universidad Politécnica de Valencia (UPV)
Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3ª planta
Valencia – 46022 (España)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120323/38a41369/attachment.html>


More information about the openEHR-clinical mailing list