I have a question regarding licensing of the results. Will they be freely available to other institutions? What are your policies regarding that?

I looked around, but didn't find an answer.

Otherwise, looks good!

Pending an answer from the lab. . I found this on their website:

"The Rosetta codes are available to academics free of charge under a non-exclusive license while industry may obtain Rosetta through a non-exclusive license. Please contact Digital Ventures to request more information."

http://depts.washington.edu/ventures/Portfolio_Highlights/Rosetta.php

Since this project seems to be working to improve the Rosetta program, I would guess it is available to other institutions.

---

I just got word from David Baker and he says, "yes, everything will be publicly available--please assure him on that!" So I assure you, the results will be publicly available. :) We also have a structure prediction server, Robetta, that uses Rosetta and is available for free to academic users. We hope to integrate this project with Robetta -- there is currently a long wait period for results because of limited computing resources.

---

I just got word from David Baker and he says, "yes, everything will be publicly available--please assure him on that!" So I assure you, the results will be publicly available. :)

That's no assurance at all.

I thought about joining Rosetta@home as second project in addition to CPDN.

But protein structures are patentable things (especially in the USofA) whreas climate models are not (at least in the EU).

So, if the work is publicly available afterwards - why not stating so on the main page to attract more users?

By not doing this, the whole thing just leaves a bad taste (in German: schaler Beigeschmack, meaning you don't know if s.th. actually is what it claims to be).

Cheers

Sorry, but i am distrusting for as long as there is no clear statemnt on the page. And despite this forum type cite from somewhere outer space that shall assure whatever, what you can read in the factual license terms is:

Restrictions

You may install Rosetta on a computer system only if you own the system or have the permission of the owner. You may not alter Rosetta or associated data files.

Rosetta may only be used to process data provided by UW and to return processed data to UW.

>>>> You may not use the data received or obtained by Rosetta in any way for any purpose.

Distribution

There is no charge for Rosetta.
>>>> Distribution of Rosetta is prohibited.


Which sounds rather restricitive as a baseline.

Currently, methinks, you're sucking freebies for cash.

I feel the same way. While I greatly admire the idea of pursuing basic science to cure diseases etc. etc., why should I contribute to a project such as this if I'm not sure its results and benefits will be available to (at least) all interested researchers? Alas, I'd be better off doing voluntary work at my third-world country's universities. :-)

For me to participate in the project, there would have to be a clear statement about this subject in its web page. It should be seen by the project developers as a necessary counterpart to the license agreement (https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_license.php): why must I agree to this license agreement in order to work FOR the project, while the project itself does not state any responsibilities in return?

But... "otherwise, looks good"!

---