National Center for Biotechnology Information (Gene) - ncbi-gene

Grade
The grade for the resource as automatically determined by the criteria violations.
1.5
Description
A full description of the resource from the resource itself, if possible.
Gene integrates information from a wide range of species. A record may include nomenclature, Reference Sequences (RefSeqs), maps, pathways, variations, phenotypes, and links to genome-, phenotype-, and locus-specific resources worldwide.
Last curated
(Optional) The ISO 8601 date of when the resource was last curated.
Unknown
Location
URL for the resource.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/
Source type
(Optional) How the resource relates to the data it contains. Current allowable entries are: "unknown", "repository", and "source", and "integrator".
TBD
Curation status
Whether or not annotation is complete on this resource. Current allowable entries are: "complete", "incomplete", and "nonpublic".
complete
Field
The area of research for the resource.
biology
Type
The type of data the resource contains.
genomic resource
Categories
(Optional) Tags to describe the resource and its data.
gene definition
taxon definition
gene-publication association
Access
(Optional) Links to the resource's data.
download
License
The license that is used by the resource. We use SPDX where we can (https://spdx.org/licenses/) or: "unknown", "public domain", "all rights reserved", or "custom".
custom
License type
The type of license that is being used. This will be to define compatible data pools in the future; we only use the grossest terms now. If it is not known "TODO" is used. Current possible values are: "unknown", "copyleft", "permissive", "public domain", "copyright", "restrictive", or "closed pool".
unknown
License location
(Optional) The link to the resource license.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/home/about/policies.shtml
Focused curation
(Optional) Setting this flag to true indicates that the licensing was combinatorially complicated enough (as is the case in some commercial licenses) that the curator chose to wear a single "hat" during the process. From the site text: "While we try to cover as much of the licensing possibilities of a data resource that we can, in a few cases we may choose a particular "hat" to wear while evaluating to prevent a combinatorial explosion, which may also reduce the clarity of our curations for the community. In these cases, we may take on the role of a (1) non-commercial (2) academic (3) group that is (4) based in the US and trying to (5) create an aggregating resource, noting that other entities may have different results in the license commentary."
false
Issues
(Optional) Structured issues with the license. For every issue discovered with a resource, there should be a corresponding item in the license-issues field that marks the /exact/ violation, along with any comments. This field can be used by resources as the first step to improvement, as well as clarify any surrounding circumstances. Any issues or thoughts about a resource that do not slot into one of the criteria violations can go into the license-commentary field.
Criteria A.2: The license apparently uses language to declare something similar to "public domain", but with the caveat that it may contain data that is otherwise.
Criteria B.1: This is judged to be a violation as any (re)use would depend on negotiating with all upstream copyright holders, which are not presented.
Criteria B.2.1: It is implied that their license does not cover all data.
Criteria B.2.2: Could not find an explicit "clean" version of the data in the downloads.
Criteria D.1.2: There is no apparent way to guarantee usage without possibly violating copyright.
Criteria E.1.2: There is no apparent way to guarantee usage without possibly violating copyright.
Commentary
(Optional) Further commentary on the license, possibly including the though process of the curations and things like locations of additional licenses.
• We specifically avoided the more general operation of the EUtils suite, focusing on the provided downloads.
• The following statements from the license page seem to support a custom "hands off" approach. To was difficult to decide if this was "restrictive" or "unknown.
• ...NCBI itself places no restrictions on the use or distribution of the data contained therein. Nor do we accept data when the submitter has requested restrictions on reuse or redistribution...
• ...some submitters of the original data...may claim patent, copyright, or other intellectual property rights in all or a portion of the data (that has been submitted)...
• ...NCBI cannot provide comment or unrestricted permission concerning the use, copying, or distribution of the information contained in the molecular databases...
Controversial
(Optional) Marker noting that there was some extended internal discussion or controversy about the evaluation of the licensing terms. If this is marked at "true", the controversy, or a link to a permanent archive of the controversy, must be sufficiently contained in the "license-commentary" to reconstruct the issues.
false
Contacts
(Optional) Resource contact information, link, email, or whatever is public.
info@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Grants
(Optional) Semi-structured list of supporting grants.
TBD

All copyrightable materials on this site are © 2017 the (Re)usable Data Project under the CC-BY 4.0 license.
ReusableData.org is funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) OT3 TR002019 as part of the Biomedical Data Translator project.
The (Re)usable Data Project would like to acknowledge the assistance of many more people than can be listed here. Please visit the about page for the full list.