-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
Description
As it stands the studies and trials endpoints include information about any license that may be associated with the data.
The question then becomes, does anyone who pulls data from these studies or trials need to actively accept those license terms before they can access the data? Or is the assumption that by pulling data that has a license associated with it you implicitly accept the license terms?
As an example, Germinate requires a license to be accepted before any data that's part of the trial/study associated with the license can be accessed.
Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure what the requirements are for accepting license terms before data consumption.
So I thought I'd highlight this issue and raise some open questions. I'd be interested to hear what others think and how others currently handle this situation.
- Do license terms need to be enforced and manually accepted?
- Should pulling the data from a trial/study with a license implicitly accept the license terms?
- How do other systems currently handle licenses both within and outwith BrAPI?
- When no human is involved in the data exchange, would an automated process legally be allowed to accept a license and pull the data?
- Do we need a dedicated license entity with its own endpoints for CRUD operations and assigning licenses to trials/studies?
- Should information about the data license be added to any
observationsendpoint or is it sufficient that it's included in any linked study/trial? - When migrating data from one system to another, is it ensured that license terms are maintained? What if the license restricts data migration for some reason?