Over the last few days I have been discussing licencing of datasets with some colleagues here at the University of Glasgow.
We need to clarify support for review of licence terms and recording of licences.
We will be looking at how we manage licencing in of data e.g. where a researcher wants to use data owned by a third party to do some research. We have seen example agreements which state that any research results emerging from use of the data become the Intellectual Property of the third party. We need to make sure there is clear advice to staff as to what to look out for when obtaining data from third parties.
The Digital Curation Centre provides some advice on licencing out data at:
We will be convening a working group early 2012 to start work on formal policies for Data Management and Storage as well as reviewing and augmenting the support we already have in place.
We hope to both learn from others who who have done work on policies and share our views with the community.
Just finished an extremely useful C4D technical meeting with Brigitte Joerg and Keith Jeffery from euroCRIS looking at how we can map MEDIN into CERIF. We have made a first pass at the work and will be producing a formal document soon for consultation with our users
Still at MRD, now listening to Brian from UCL talking about the REWARD project which focuses on the motivations of researchers. He has just talked about “data papers” which were new to me. basically it is a published version of the data with a bit of surrounding text on what it is and how it was collected etc. Importantly it would get a DOI and hence be easily citeable. The example given was the journal of open archaeological data. Interesting idea for C4D.
At the MRD programme launch and listening to Mansur Darlington talking about his REDm-MED project. He has coined the term “re-usefulness” and given a list of things that affect the “re-usefulness” of data (and information)’ including:
. Desirability … Eg data collect can now be collected easily and more accurately
Using the benefits analysis toolkit from Charles Beagrie, we spent the morning session at Nottingham identifying key benefits and metrics for C4D.
We had to choose three key benefits (from quite a large list) for the research community which we agreed were as follows:-
- Integrated thinking around research data management
- Enhanced finding and organising of data
- Greater consistency and standards between projects to enable data re-use
These benefits can be assessed using the following metrics:-
Enhanced finding and organising of data:-
- number of research dataset publications generated
- increased visibility of research through data citation
- number of data deposits within repository
- number of downloads of datasets from repository
- number of citations to datasets in research articles
Integrated thinking around research data management:-
- Average time saved in research data management and grant proposal activities
- Results of user feedback forms
Greater consistency and standards between projects to enable data re-use
- Number of datasets deposited with enhanced metadata
Some of the metrics are more difficult to measure than others, and that will be one of the challenges for C4D.
At the MRD launch meeting in Nottingham and obvious that many of the projects are looking for a generic layer of metadata to link data sets to other research info and to facilitate discovery and reuse.
Suggest C4D surveys the other projects to get feedback on the generic metadata they are proposing/using .. Or maybe need a more interactive way of collating this?
Any suggestions welcome