There have been a number of discussions around the fact that we are adding Safety and Toxicity Data to ChemSpider. The comments section contain some cautions from Cameron Neylon about a disclaimer. We have had one online for a while but we have now updated the site and linked the disclaimer from above every Supplementary Info section.  Thanks to Cameron for his support and suggestions in this area.

Disclaimer

For all documents, data and software available via this website and server, ChemZoo does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed. Specifically, any information listed here should not be relied on for any assessment of the risks of any specific procedure or process. You should always carry out your own risk assessment for any experiment, procedure, or process. In particular the information here may not be correct or appropriate to local regulations, legal codes, practices or policies, or may be out of date. The authors will take no responsibility for any injury, loss, or damage caused in any manner whatsoever by the use of this information.Some ChemSpider Web pages link to other web pages for the convenience of users. ChemZoo is not responsible for the availability or content of these web pages. ChemZoo does not endorse or warrant the services, products or information offered at these other webpages unless explicitly stated.

The ChemSpider website is maintained by ChemZoo Inc. For site security purposes we use software programs and algorithms to monitor traffic and to identify unauthorized attempts to upload or change information or otherwise cause damage to the ChemSPider service. In the event of unauthorized activities utilizing the ChemSpider server information from these sources may be used to help identify an individual for prosecution.

The data on the ChemSpider web site are sourced from a number of contributors and collaborators. The majority of data were originally sourced from the NCBI-Pubchem website and are made available under the explicit statements and disclaimers provided by NCBI. Specifically, NCBI places no restrictions on the use or distribution of the data contained within their database. ChemZoo have abided by the assumptions of NCBI. These are specifically “While some submitters of the original data (or the country of origin of such data) may claim patent, copyright, or other intellectual property rights in all or a portion of the data (that has been submitted). NCBI is not in a position to assess the validity of such claims and, therefore, cannot provide comment or unrestricted permission concerning the use, copying, or distribution of the information contained in the molecular databases.” In this regard should any contributors to the NCBI-Pubchem database wish to have their data removed from the ChemSpider website please send a detailed request to info-at-chemspider-dot-com.

Revised: May 9^th, 2008

ChemSpider has taken some thrashing over the past year. We’ve been hit on science (and proven our point many times), on Open Access versus Free Access statements, on whether or not we have Open Data or not. There has been encouragement to define what the data on our site is in terms of Open Data or not. We’ve adopted Open Data tags on deposited data from users after pressure there. When I’ve asked more about Open Data I have heard that it is not ratified at the same level as Creative Commons licenses and they would be better to use. A week ago we put up Creative Commons Licenses in what I hoped was a GOOD move for the ChemSpider site and would relax the criticism of our site and potentially receive their blessing and support.

We received a blessing for all of 72 hours. In his blog post Peter Murray-Rust was DELIGHTED with our decision to do this. I quote: “I am DELIGHTED to report that Chemspider has adopted a CC-SA licence for its data.” and espoused “PMR: This is wonderful. As far as I know Chemspider is the only commercial chemical information company offering data under this licence, which is completely compatible with the Open Knowledge Definition. (It is also BBB-compliant, though data and publications are different animals).”

I assumed therefore we’d done a good thing. There was no indication to me that our postion was anything other than positive.

There has been a conversation going on in the blogosphere for a couple of weeks now about Strong and Weak Open Access. I’ve read, watched and simply let others share their opinions because they’ve been in Open Access discussions for a number of years and have more context, background and passion to stay engaged in these discussions. They ARE important discussions and will come to a conclusion.

It appears that “I” am confused by Creative Commons licenses. This based on the fact that 72 hours we had done a good thing and got a blessing but 3 days later I read yet another post this time with a comment  from John Wilbanks stating “I’d like to see a meaningful discussion of the risks of Share Alike and Attribution on data integration. Chemspider’s move to CC BY SA fits into this discussion nicely - it’s a total violation of the open data protocol we laid out at SC, which says “Don’t Use CC Licenses on Data” - but it does conform inside the broader OKD.”

Uh-oh. ChemSpider is in Total Violation of Creative Commons Licenses. As we say in Wales in times of distress … “Hell’s Bells” (My dad was a builder..if you believe he taught me to curse like that well….)

Peter followed it up with a comment “PMR: I agree with John. Licences are not appropriate for data (and when I applauded Chemspider it was for the motivation rather than the actual mechanism - CC-SA is conformant to the OK definition, but difficult to operate for re-use). That’s why we use the OKF’s OpenData sticker on CrystalEye.” Hmmm…

Again, when I’ve asked about the OpenData sticker I’ve been informed that this is not yet ratified.

There have been many discussions about Openness I’ve been involved with..just one example here. It has been difficult. Openness and licensing remains confusing…see here an example and this is just about a blogsite!

So the question is what now? Do we remove Creative Commons Licenses? Do we adopt Open Data licenses or do we just get ourselves out of the middle of this entire confusing discussion until all is resolved and settled. And IF we remove CC licenses and don’t post other licenses I know we’ll get criticized for that too. But let’s be honest…we’ve been highlighted for NOT having licenses up to this point. Now we are highlighted FOR having them. Maybe we can hope that no press is bad press. I’ll await feedback on this post and make a decision about what to do in the next 48 hours. Blog away…

I am posting this in order to help one of my “neighbors”, IUPAC in Research Triangle Park. Their office is about 30 minutes from where I live. This is a beautiful area of the world and I encourage people to contact the Secretariat directly should you have an interest in this role.

Post-doctoral Position in Chemistry Informatics

Develop, implement, and support web based applications to enable IUPAC Staff and Committee members to work more effectively. The emphasis will be on development of tools for communication and collaboration to allow scientists working on IUPAC projects to accomplish their project goals while minimizing the need for travel. This will build on the new architecture of the IUPAC web site that uses XML technology to organize the information used by IUPAC members as well as the general scientific public. In addition, methods will be developed to organize and present IUPAC’s information, now contained in books and journal articles, to make it more accessible and more useful.

This position is located at the IUPAC Secretariat in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA and will require considerable travel.

Required background: PhD or equivalent in Chemistry or a related discipline so as to combine a reasonable chemical knowledge with computing expertise; experience with SQL databases and XML coding; excellent written English and the ability to deal with multiple projects simultaneously.

Salary and benefits are competitive and will depend on experience and qualifications.

IUPAC was formed in 1919 by chemists from industry and academia. For almost nine decades, the Union has succeeded in fostering worldwide communications in the chemical sciences and in uniting academic, industrial and public sector chemistry in a common language. IUPAC is recognized as the world authority on chemical nomenclature, terminology, standardized methods for measurement, atomic weights and many other critically evaluated data. In more recent years, IUPAC has been pro-active in establishing a wide range of conferences and projects designed to promote and stimulate modern developments in chemistry, and also to assist in aspects of chemical education and the public understanding of chemistry.

More information about IUPAC and its activities is available at <www.iupac.org>.

Contact:

John W. Jost, Executive Director

IUPAC Secretariat

P.O. Box 13757

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3757, USA

E-mail: secretariatATiupacDOTorg