I am aware of Figshare but am not quite sure whether I am happy with attributing a CC0 licence to my data.
Sharing on our own server would not add a DOI and thus it would not be citeable.
SO what other services like figshare do you know and what licence would you apply to your data?
re: Unique identifiers
We had a workshop on this topic here at the RBGE last year, below is the link to the write-up that may provide you with some background and leads to follow.
re: licences - it's creative commons for data.
http://stories.rbge.org.uk/archives/3846
http://creativecommons.org/choose/
We use figshare but are working with our library to develop this functionality in-house. Our license is usually CC0 but also CC-BY
Just stumbled upon Zenodo which is the CERN version of Figshare. They are very flexible regarding licensing. Any experiences with this?
If I want to upload data from a already published paper, does it have to be CC0 because otherwise I would have broken my own licence? This licensing stuff is really messing with my brain...
@Robert, thanks for the link but it seems to be down.
https://zenodo.org/
Zenodo actually looks very good - free choice of license, you can link to the original publication and if you enter a grant number, they will automatically notify the funding agency. The connection to CERN spurs trust in their storage capabilities, too.
Regarding your license question: What license does the paper use? I think if the data was not part of the publication then you're free to choose another license.
Anyway, what you probably want is that other people use your data (and cite your paper). The most important thing about the license is that it explicitly allows to use the data in research and to publish derived analyses. Any license that fulfils this is better than no license ;)
Just checked and the paper uses CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 so NonCommercial ShareAlike.
What do you mean with "data was not part of the publication"? We did not publish the raw-data along with the paper but the data was the basis of the paper.
I thought that only if the raw data was published with the paper, e.g. as a downloadable supplement, it might be subject to the license that covers the paper.
But I might be wrong - any license geek on RG who'd like to comment?
Hi ! If the publishing agreement did not include the raw data and there are no other agreements limiting your choice, then you are free to choose a Creative Commons license that suits you. If you open you data with CC-BY 4.0 you get attribution in the form that you give as attribution information, and you can have URL of your choice in that information. CC0 is recommended for sharing metadata and in those cases wherer attribution is not wished for, but my understanding is that using CC-BY 4.0 is usually preferred.
- Badges
- Science topic