Ian McNicoll ian at
Wed Apr 12 05:22:38 EDT 2017

Hi Bert,

This is a good and timely post. We are just finalising an Affiliate License
agreement with SNOMED. It has not been formally signed off but the broad
approach is that we are allowed to put SNOMED bindings in archetypes as
long as it is made clear to users of those archetypes that they must be
appropriately SNOMED-licensed if  they want to use those bindings in
run-time systems. This is roughly consistent with the approach reached with

As far as I am aware none of the current bindings in archetypes force the
use of SNOMED at run-time.

So practically, no-one should be concerned about using archetypes with
SNOMED bindings, unless they intend to use SNOMED within their systems, in
which case they should make sure they are covered by a national or
individual licence.



Dr Ian McNicoll
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
office +44 (0)1536 414994
skype: ianmcnicoll
email: ian at
twitter: @ianmcnicoll

Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnicoll at
Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd.
Director, HANDIHealth CIC
Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL

On 12 April 2017 at 09:56, Bert Verhees <bert.verhees at> wrote:

> Hi,
> I needed to clean up archetypes from SNOMED bindings because of
> license-reasons, I "grepped" the local directory from CKM.
> To my surprise I found there SNOMED bindings in over 50 archetypes.
> This can, I think, be a problem for countries which have no SNOMED license.
> Or is the opinion that SNOMED is allowed in archetypes even in
> non-member-countries.
> Bert
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the openEHR-clinical mailing list