I love the idea of my computer doing something usefull, other than games, and occasional cursing practice.
Yet I am concerned by some lack of data, or maybe the ovewhelming amount of data on the subject.

What is the end result of this project? If it is for the good of all?
I have 2 problems

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

You own the code, the data in, the data out, heck I better stop now as I'm using the data and code to heat my room.Clearly violating rule #2.

OK so if there is a agreement as to R@H use of my CPUs, I can't find it. Only a ton of he said/she said.

Please enlighten me with FACTS, like a offical reply, that i can find, kinda like the above rules.
Cory

---

You might be interested in this page:

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_medical_relevance.php

And Dr. Baker's Journal in the science forum:

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=1177

---

Sorry, I'm not really finding the answer.

Who ends up with the results (The rules kinda exclude me, not that i have a use)

I know the whole drug manufactures will make a fortune bit, That not my question.

Who gets/owns the resulting code/data?

Sorry if i missed it in the link, or my searching. But I find nothing concrete.


Thanks for the link, I did detect a pattern in.
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=1177

Error rates are lower than ever (2% Linux, 5% Windows, 6% Mac)

(open, closed, closed-er)

---

Sorry, I'm not really finding the answer.
...
Error rates are lower than ever
(2% Linux, 5% Windows, 6% Mac)
(open, closed, closed-er)

www.rosettacommons.org
Does this answer your question ?

-H. (linux user trying to avoid Windows whenever possible ;-)

---

Team betterhumans.com - discuss and celebrate the future - hoelder1in.org

The predicted protein structures will be available to the public through the public protein databases. Turning what we find into an actual drug has to be performed by a for-profit company (ie big pharma), just because no one else can afford to do it. So the drug will be patented, the actual protein won't be - another company is free to make a competing drug using the same information about the protein structure.


The part you quoted is just a basic licensing for the Rosetta@Home application... bascially, you can only use it for its intended purpose and not collect the data for your own purpose (ie to claim as your own) - heating your room is caused by the processor being stressed... nothing to worry there ;)

---

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_about.php

Issume you've read that?


But currently Rosetta@Home is a test ground for the Rosetta code (which is available if you wish to help improve it, though how to get it is burried in thread somewhere) and other acedemics may run test for predictions on the Rosetta@home platform.

Some of our improvements have already been put to use over at WCG and it use of the Rosetta code in the HPF-II project (you'll need to read at the Wold Community Grid for information about that)
Accoriding to David Baker journal we will soon be using Rosetta@Home for direct HIV targetting. Though how it does it is beyond my understanding at the moment ;-). probably reading this will tell me https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_research.php

could go on but hey the links are all here to read.....



Though that doesn't directly answer and is not official, just background which is what your kind of asking in the first post.

But ultimatly it is run by the The Baker group at the University of Washington
http://depts.washington.edu/bakerpg/

Q) Who owns the code.
A) All details about the actual code is here http://depts.washington.edu/ventures/UW_Technology/Express_Licenses/Rosetta/ But the Rosetta@Home code is owned by the University of Washington (the developers)

Q) Who own the data it get back
A) From your/license agreement point of view it would be Rosetta@home.
But I would think it's themselves/their collaborators and the general public that has access to the peer reviewed publications ;-). Just depends on what it is at that time being used for.


....

---

Team mauisun.org

Seems like the would be something on the website with some facts. R@H is non-profit, but R@H is just the org barrowing my computer. So at best i see this as a donation to a university.
On to another diffrent project.
Cory

---

If it is a donation to the my alma mater, then I feel even better about participating. :-)

How about considering it a donation to humanity?

Seems like the would be something on the website with some facts. R@H is non-profit, but R@H is just the org barrowing my computer. So at best i see this as a donation to a university.
On to another diffrent project.
Cory

Top right corner of the screen: University of Washington. Specifically, Prof. Dr. Baker's lab: http://www.bakerlab.org/

Not sure what you mean by going to a different project, they're all based at universities.

---

How about considering it a donation to humanity?

That's my question, will it be?

Not sure what you mean by going to a different project, they're all based at universities.

Some have open out comes.

My question is if/when it's perfected, will it be sold to "one" company for a billion, who will intern get a use patent on "rag weed" as a treatment for HIV? While hidding that "rat crap" is a cure?

Sorry, but i often feel dogs have more humanity than humans.

---

Ahh, I understand what you mean now. Any findings Rosetta@Home makes are made freely available to everyone. This is a not-for-profit project, so the results won't be sold.

However, keep in mind that we do not actually produce a cure. The research Rosetta makes can (and will be) used for cures, but there's a lot of work still left to be done afterwards. That kind of work can only be done by a pharma company, but there'll be open competition: everyone can get Rosetta's results and make their cure.

The cure itself will be sold for profit, of course, but there's no project working on cures that can claim anything else. The cost it takes to bring a drug to the market is BILLIONS of dollars (and years in clinical and human trials), even with all the infrastructure (buildings, scientists, machines) already in place it's incredibly expensive.


It may seem cruel to sell those vital drugs for profit, but remember that there's a very large investment necessary to bring ANY drug to the market. If there's no profit to be made, no one would invest money and we wouldn't get any drugs at all.


But this isn't what Rosetta does - they (we) just predict the structure of the protein and make that available to everyone free of charge.

---

Thank you, I've been trying to find that.

---

I ran across a news article on a new vaccine for Malaria that the developers were all excited about. Here.

This is just another reminder about how long it takes to get a treatment out into the field; and the vaccines mentioned have already had some human testing.

So everything that our helping improve the Rosetta client helps find at other projects that use the Rosetta client - or even here when we start to help with Dr. Baker's AIDs work, won't be instant cures.

---

Ahh, I understand what you mean now. Any findings Rosetta@Home makes are made freely available to everyone.

That is a lie! Rosetta is a closed source project! No one can use software except he/she got licence, which strictly forbid redistribution.

This is a not-for-profit project, so the results won't be sold.

That is total bullshit! Won't be sold? We are helping improve Roseta package - and it officially on sale - read prices at the end of the file:
http://depts.washington.edu/ventures/UW_Technology/Express_Licenses/Rosetta/Rosetta++EX.pdf
$50 000 + $20 000 yearly fee!
How ppl could lie so blatantly?

---

Ahh, I understand what you mean now. Any findings Rosetta@Home makes are made freely available to everyone.

That is a lie! Rosetta is a closed source project! No one can use software except he/she got licence, which strictly forbid redistribution.

This is a not-for-profit project, so the results won't be sold.

That is total bullshit! Won't be sold? We are helping improve Roseta package - and it officially on sale - read prices at the end of the file:
http://depts.washington.edu/ventures/UW_Technology/Express_Licenses/Rosetta/Rosetta++EX.pdf
$50 000 + $20 000 yearly fee!
How ppl could lie so blatantly?

Hey, why such an aggressive tone? Before making such bold statements do a bit more research and try to be a bit more differentiated.

Some facts:
1. Rosetta is a research project and publishes the results. Any findings they do will be published in scientific papers and thus be available to the public.
2. Rosetta is free to use for academic purposes. Any progress they make with the application is therefore available for academic purposes.
3. The code is closed-source but again available for academic purposes. There is an active Rosetta developer community of about 150 people (I guess) which all work from time to time on the code. It's not downloadable but hardly kept very secret from the academic public.
4. Rosetta is not free for commercial use. This means our contribution to Rosetta won't be used free of charge from commercial companies. I for myself am glad of it, since those companies can afford to pay for work and do not need voluntary computing power. All license fees from commercial companies fund further research with Rosetta.

I find this construction very well suited, since it guarantees multiple goals:

1. The findings and the progress will be available for academic use and contribute to the overall progress of protein structure prediction.
2. Commercial companies can't just make profits out of the voluntary contribution from us but have to pay for that.

Isn't that a very good and balanced construction?

Administrator: Before you call people liars, you really need to read the stuff you post.

The results of what we crunch are protein structures. Those are made available at no charge to the scientific community. The licensing contract is for the CODE of rosetta used for COMMERCIAL applications by entities not part of the University of Washington.

If Pharma Giant A wants to use Rosetta on their own machines to do their own research, they need to pay a licensing fee for the code. The Rosetta application code isn't open source and no one ever claimed it was. No research project has an open source application, because it'd allow everyone to modify their results making anything produced worthless.

Any improvements we help to make are still used for non-commercial purposes - namely HIV vaccines and soon prediction of unknown protein structures. The 'crunching' is our work and the results are available freely. The improved code (work of the researchers, but also backed on findings from our crunching) helps both non-profit research, as well as commercial.


edit: By the way, the contract also says that improvements made by the licensee to the software can't be copyrighted/patented and Rosetta reserves the right to copy the effect. Meaning if pharma giant A managed to increase the performance by 10%, that'd flow right back into Rosetta@Home ;)

Licensee shall gain no ownership in the Software or Restricted Patent Rights under this Agreement. Licensee acknowledges the right of the UW to prepare and publish modifications to Software that may be substantially similar or functionally equivalent to Licensee’s Modifications and improvements [...]

---

The purpose of the project is to improve methods behind the Rosetta software.
Rosetta is closed source package with very restrictive license. So Any findings Rosetta@Home makes are made freely available to everyone is a lie.

As a claim:
This is a not-for-profit project, so the results won't be sold.
Yes, this is also not true - you can see from pdf, Rosetta is for sale - and for a price.

I'm claiming nothing more the what stated above.

The results of what we crunch are protein structures. Those are made available at no charge to the scientific community.

The aim/purpose of the project not generating structures - but helping team to improve software that predict 3d-shape of proteins.

---

Rosetta@home needs your help to determine the 3-dimensional shapes of proteins in research that may ultimately lead to finding cures for some major human diseases. By running the Rosetta program on your computer while you don't need it you will help us speed up and extend our research in ways we couldn't possibly attempt without your help. You will also be helping our efforts at designing new proteins to fight diseases such as HIV, Malaria, Cancer, and Alzheimer's

I'm pretty sure the application refining process is coming to an end. They had to figure out how many WUs give a reasonable probability to find a close one.

As I understand it, Rosetta@Home is already used to find possible cure targets - though not in the way we use it now. Our approach to designing proteins would be very inefficient for a big company - they don't have nearly the processing power of this project. If they want a promissing structure, they use one of the expensive lab methods.

---

I'm pretty sure the application refining process is coming to an end.

The method that would allow accurate and reliable determination of shape of protein based only on DNA sequence I'm afraid dozens year away from now. Hopefully there would be major breakthrough in the field, and that will happens faster - but chances are very low for that. So Rosetta most likely would be constantly improving for years to come.

Don't get me wrong - I think this is very worthwhile cutting eage research, made by one of the best team of scientist in the protein structure prediction field. This research have a good chance to help develop better drugs /cure in the future. So I'm happily crunching - but please do not say that it free for everyone!

---

Science doesn't always travel a slow progressive line. Suprises do happen that greatly accelerate things.

As to who are we doing this far, This is still academic as no "Big Pharma's" have expressed any real interests in these projects. Baker Labs will continue to publish results publicly for any researchers to use for further study. This helps speed up advancememt of the science across the entire academic community.

---