BOINC - who owns the results (patents etc.)?

[Franko30]

Hi,

like some other people in this forum I've been running SETI@home and CPDN (climateprediction.net) for quite some time and after switching from Windows mostly to Ubuntu I've been trying the BOINC version of CPDN and got to know about other projects like Rosetta@home, Predictor@home or www.worldcommunitygrid.org

Now, as we're all users of a free, open-source operating system: Did anybody ask themselves who's going to 'own' the intellectual property on new proteins and stuff developped using OUR computer time (donations that cost us money for hardware and electricity).

I don't think about compensating the users for their CPU time - but about supporting only projects that give back their work to those who helped making it possible.

I'm sure that with SETI and CPDN it doesn't matter who might own the results - they still will benefit the whole world somehow.

But that's not the case if we help computing stuff that's going to be patented like proteins or medicine.

And If I read forum posts like this at Rosetta@home:

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=6

or this at worldcommunitygrid

http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread?thread=199

I really wonder if the stuff will be publicly available or if we help companies getting their patents faster and cheaper...

So, please do as I did:

Ask the projects you donate computer time to, if they're going to patent the stuff you help to discover or if it will end up in the public domain!

Thanks and Cheers

Franko30

[hillbilly]

Thats a pretty good point you make there !!

[mstlyevil]

Hi,

like some other people in this forum I've been running SETI@home and CPDN (climateprediction.net) for quite some time and after switching from Windows mostly to Ubuntu I've been trying the BOINC version of CPDN and got to know about other projects like Rosetta@home, Predictor@home or www.worldcommunitygrid.org

Now, as we're all users of a free, open-source operating system: Did anybody ask themselves who's going to 'own' the intellectual property on new proteins and stuff developped using OUR computer time (donations that cost us money for hardware and electricity).

I don't think about compensating the users for their CPU time - but about supporting only projects that give back their work to those who helped making it possible.

I'm sure that with SETI and CPDN it doesn't matter who might own the results - they still will benefit the whole world somehow.

But that's not the case if we help computing stuff that's going to be patented like proteins or medicine.

And If I read forum posts like this at Rosetta@home:

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=6

or this at worldcommunitygrid

http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread?thread=199

I really wonder if the stuff will be publicly available or if we help companies getting their patents faster and cheaper...

So, please do as I did:

Ask the projects you donate computer time to, if they're going to patent the stuff you help to discover or if it will end up in the public domain!

Thanks and Cheers

Franko30

Folding@Home is run by a University so the developments will be owned by the public.

[asimon]

Did anybody ask themselves who's going to 'own' the intellectual property on new proteins and stuff developped using OUR computer time (donations that cost us money for hardware and electricity)
I asked this myself for Folding@home and think that if someone really makes a cure for cancer or whatever based on the collected data then some clever company will (of course) make many billion dollars, and the contributers of cpu time may get a warm fuzzy feeling that they were a tiny part of it all. The data you submit is not intellectual property of yourself. They compute this data with their propritary software. Just because you let them use your CPU doesn't make this result of computation your intellectual property.

For Folding@home the questions "who owns the data" is answered in their FAQ. I would never ever contribute to a project where this questions is unanswered or not to my liking.



But that's not the case if we help computing stuff that's going to be patented like proteins or medicine.
I think even if that collected (raw) data is free, it's possible to patent technologies (cures, medicines, whatever) which were developed with the help of this data. And that is the aim, no way we will see public-domain non-patented cheap cancer (etc.) curing goodness. Not in this world.

[asimon]

Folding@Home is run by a University so the developments will be owned by the public.
It's only the data not the "developments"/discoveries/patents/products/etc. which can be made with the help of this data. Researchers of Stanford University will be among the first filing potential million-dollar patents if they discover something great with those results.

[Franko30]

Researchers of Stanford University will be among the first filing potential million-dollar patents if they discover something great with those results.

So why should we support it?

I guess my decision is made: I'll only support stuff like climateprediction.net that will actually benefit all of us - regardless of any patents that might be granted for climatic predictions.

Franko30

[asimon]

So why should we support it?
To push the F@H "Team Ubuntu" to get to the pole position in the team rankings. Maybe some people even want to actually help collecting data which can hopefully help researchers to better understand proteins, whatever the outcome of that research will be. There may be people who just don't care about the issues raised in this thread. This question has everyone to answer himself.
Anyway, the number of Ubuntu users who supports the Ubuntu Team at Folding@Home is rather small, currently only 49 people.



I guess my decision is made: I'll only support stuff like climateprediction.net that will actually benefit all of us - regardless of any patents that might be granted for climatic predictions.

A cure for BSE, Altzheimer, Cancer, etc. could benefit a lot of people too. And not just share-holders of pharmacy companies, but a lot of sick people (at least those who can affort the medicament). So it's not bad-only thing.

[Mr_Grieves]

Does it matter very much if millions of people will benefit from it? It's still a good cause right?

[jasay]

So why should we support it?

I guess my decision is made: I'll only support stuff like climateprediction.net that will actually benefit all of us - regardless of any patents that might be granted for climatic predictions.

Franko30
As far as foldingathome goes, if there are cures to be found for cancer, parkinsons, alzheimers, etc, you can bet someone will get rich from them when/if said cures do come about. Personally, I'd rather see the people suffering now get better than put off the day in which some drug company gets richer.

[Franko30]

Hi,

I got a lightning fast answer from the director of BOINC, his address can be found on their website, so it's OK to post it here:


Betreff: Re: Will BOINC-project-work be used for patents?
Von: David Anderson <davea@ssl.berkeley.edu>

14.01.06 00:10

Frank:

You raise a very important point.

BOINC doesn't impose any restrictions on the ownership of results computed by BOINC-based projects.
This is intentional; some people might want to compute to find cancer drugs, even if the results will be owned by a pharmaceutical company.

The bottom line: the computer owner must learn about the ownership of computation results, and use this a factor in deciding what projects to participate in. This is articulated on the web site here: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/projects.php

-- David

Still, I asked him to put the intellectual property issue on the start page, right beneath the projects.

Don't think they will do that, but still...

Franko30

[asimon]

To elaborate a little bit more on F@H. The goal of Folding@Home is to collect data which will be used to get a better understanding of protein folding and misfolding. I.e. the goal is for humanity to get more knowledge about our world. This is a great thing. I am a big fan of such things. And with many new discoveries and new aquired knowledge come people and companies which try to make profit out of it. Patents play a part there too. But should this be a reason to not do this research, to not help researchers to better understand protein folding?

Patents and companies which make billions by selling expensive medicine may be a bad thing, but I think these things are of a more fundamental level and not strictly bound to projects like Folding@home. At least F@H doesn't make money by selling the data and wants to make the data public. Patents and profits may only be a result of further research based on this free data. Thus I personaly see no compelling reason to drive some anti-patent agenda by not contributing to F@H.

PS: True free software fanatics won't contribute because the client software is propritary.

[Franko30]

What about this (found it in the WCG thread given in the first post):


I found this quote in the WCG Project Archives:

"In the first 72 hours, 100,000 results were returned. Overall, the project identified 44 strong treatment candidates, which were handed to the U.S. Department of Defense for further evaluation."

I certainly don't want to compute for that...

As someone else over in that forum said:

The cause is good, but the deal is not clear enough....

[Franko30]

Hi,

an update:

David Anderson of BOINC answered again:



Betreff: Re: Will BOINC-project-work be used for patents?
Von: David Anderson <davea@ssl.berkeley.edu> ins Adressbuch

14.01.06 01:28

I changed the web site slightly to encourage
people to read the Intellectual Property warning.
-- David

That's nice of him and I thanked him for that.

And David Baker of Rosetta@home answered, too:


Betreff: Re: Will patents be made with Rosetta@home data?
Von: David Baker <dabaker@u.washington.edu> ins Adressbuch

14.01.06 04:24

Hi Frank,

I think it is wrong to patent predicted structures, and we will not do this. I agree-anything performed with donations like this (which are huge!) should be in the public domain (actually, everything we do is freely available to everybody, except for companies trying to make a profit).

best regards,

David

So, I still don't get it why they don't say so more clearly on their page? This is a good selling argument. I sent this question to David Baker and I'm curious if he's going to answer again.

Cheers

Franko30

[asimon]

What about this (found it in the WCG thread given in the first post):

Quote:
I found this quote in the WCG Project Archives:

"In the first 72 hours, 100,000 results were returned. Overall, the project identified 44 strong treatment candidates, which were handed to the U.S. Department of Defense for further evaluation."

I certainly don't want to compute for that...
That really sound like as if only the DoD (of all things!) did get this data. No, I wouldn't want to contribute to this project either.


That's nice of him and I thanked him for that.
Very cool indeed.



So, I still don't get it why they don't say so more clearly on their page? This is a good selling argument. I sent this question to David Baker and I'm curious if he's going to answer again.
Yes, hard to understand. It really seems like only very few people do have such questions and the big majority of contributors don't cares who owns the data and what happens with it.

[Franko30]

Yes, hard to understand. It really seems like only very few people do have such questions and the big majority of contributors don't cares who owns the data and what happens with it.

Yes, and David Baker of Rosetta@home even answered again (to my info that I pass his answers along in forums):


Thanks, Frank--please do pass this along. we didn't post it I guess because it seems pretty obvious.

Hmmm - the reason I mailed him was that it is not 'pretty obvious' that their results stay in the public domain.

Well, I guess that's developer's/scientist's tunnel vision. If you're into s.th. for too long you loose perspective. ;-)

[Franko30]

Hi,

I have an update on projects, that make their results available for nonprofit use for free - and actually say so. :-)

SIMAP

find it on http://boinc.bio.wzw.tum.de/boincsimap/

and the 'prpject' page states:



The use of SIMAP is completely free for education and public research.

What are the institutions behind SIMAP?
SIMAP is a joint project of the GSF National Research Center for Environment and Health, Neuherberg and Technical University Munich, Center of Life and Food Science Weihenstephan (both in Germany). Please contact Thomas Rattei (Department of Genome Oriented Bioinformatics, TU Munich).

And as these are German institutions that - to my knowledge - are state funded, I tend to believe them more if they say so than some US American, private institutions.

Cheers

Franko30

[Agent86]

What about this (found it in the WCG thread given in the first post):

I found this quote in the WCG Project Archives:

"In the first 72 hours, 100,000 results were returned. Overall, the project identified 44 strong treatment candidates, which were handed to the U.S. Department of Defense for further evaluation."

I certainly don't want to compute for that...

That really sound like as if only the DoD (of all things!) did get this data. No, I wouldn't want to contribute to this project either.

The quote above about the US DOD is about a project sponsored by the US DOD using client software from United Devices (the people who make the non-BOINC ******* client for WCG) regarding smallpox treatment. This project ended before the World Community Grid started. It was the success of the smallpox project that inspired IBM to start the World Community Grid.

If you have questions about where your results for the World Community Grid will end up, here is a quote directly from the WCG About Us page:

"World Community Grid is making technology available only to public and not-for-profit organizations to use in humanitarian research that might otherwise not be completed due to the high cost of the computer infrastructure required in the absence of a public grid. As part of our commitment to advancing human welfare, all results will be in the public domain and made public to the global research community."

(Emphasis mine.)

That is pretty clear to me. The WCG's projects (currently FightAIDS@home and the Human Proteome Project) will generate results that will go into the public domain. I wouldn't be very comfortable if the results generated by the WCG were going to the US DOD, either. But THEY ARE NOT GOING THERE.