Peter Murray-Rust on open data-Part 2
| 7 February, 2011 | Richard P. Grant |
3
|
|
In this second of three videos featuring Peter Murray-Rust, from the Chemistry Department of the University of Cambridge, recorded at the Panton Arms, I ask him if he has faced any opposition to the concept of open data.
Peter is more concerned about the dangers of partial publication, where in his words people want the credit of publishing data without actually revealing it all.
There is absolutely no requirement for a company to publish its data
We also talked about the carrots and sticks relating to open data: Peter notes that there is an increasing moral imperative to make material freely available, but also notes that there are increasing benefits to this strategy.
|
|
previous post
Before there was so much interest in the subject, the journal I edit considered requiring publication of all data. We concluded that all data should be available to editors, but there were important objections to its publication – see http://annhyg.oxfordjournals.org/content/53/7/651.full.pdf+html . The most difficult problem mentioned is that there have been cases where industry has reinterpreted published data to produce different conclusions favourable to itself. Making data avaiable for further analysis can be a benefit, but as Peter Murray-Rust notes, there is no requirement on industry to publish its own data. This produces an asymmetry that can work against the public interest.
I would just add that I think that many of the arguments in favour of publishing data come from sections of science where there are no well-financed interests with a commercial interest in undermining papers.
Thanks Trevor, that’s very interesting.