Newly published - TU Delft Research Software Policy and Guidelines

14 Apr 2021

TU Delft has recently published its Research Software Policy and guidelines. I am sharing in case this is of interest for the discussions within the group :)
As TU Delft's rewards and recognition system is changing, sharing software in a compliant manner enhances the contribution of its researchers to science and offers them recognition that extends beyond research papers. Therefore, TU Delft has drafted and recently published the TU Delft Research Software Policy and new Guidelines set out a simplified, streamlined process to help researcher to manage and share research software.
TUD Research Software Policy:
TU Delft Guidelines on Research Software: Licensing, Registration and Commercialisation:
Best wishes,
Paula Martinez Lavanchy, PhD
Research Data Officer
4TU.ResearchData | TU Delft Library
(availability Monday - Friday)
e ***@***.***
[cid:44AE9783-2812-459D-B175-EE07C259783B] @paulammartinez2
w data.4tu/nl/info/en | [cid:44AE9783-2812-459D-B175-EE07C259783B] @4TUResearchData
w | [cid:44AE9783-2812-459D-B175-EE07C259783B] @tudelftlibrary
Subscribe to the 4TU.ResearchData newsletter for the latest on RDM, FAIR data & Open Science news &events!

  • Paula Andrea Martinez's picture

    Author: Paula Andrea Ma...

    Date: 14 Apr, 2021

    Thank you Paula,
    These two are great resources to share. I was personally looking for guides
    on Software Citation. If anyone else has something to share I will
    appreciate it.
    with kind regards,
    Paula Andrea Martinez
    On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 16:56, paml via FAIR for Research Software (FAIR4RS)
    WG <***@***.***> wrote:

  • Roberto Di Cosmo's picture

    Author: Roberto Di Cosmo

    Date: 14 Apr, 2021

    Dear Paula,
    thank you so much for sharing.
    I do not necessarily agree with everything that is written therein (in
    particular, I strongly disagree on the statement about patentability of software
    in the companion "Research Software Guidelines" [1]), but I like these documents for
    several reasons:
    - the key policy is stated clearly in the introduction
    - it provides a decision diagram (technically, it's not a tree ;-))
    - the drafting committee involved a variety of expertises and put researchers in the loop
    - they are approved by the board of the University
    - they are public
    It is a great example to follow.
    Roberto Di Cosmo
    [1] despite the existence of 30.000+ software patents delivered by the EPO, and
    repeated efforts from lobbys to alter Article 52 of the European Patent
    Convention (, the legal
    value of a software patent in Europe is far from established. The experience
    I am aware of with software patents is that they cost a fortune, their
    legal value is uncertain, and they are mostly useless in practice for
    performing technical transfer around software.
    Computer Science Professor
    (on leave at INRIA from IRIF/Université de Paris)
    Software Heritage
    Bureau C328 E-mail : ***@***.***
    2, Rue Simone Iff Web page :
    CS 42112 Twitter :
    75589 Paris Cedex 12 Tel : +33 1 80 49 44 42
    GPG fingerprint 2931 20CE 3A5A 5390 98EC 8BFC FCCA C3BE 39CB 12D3

submit a comment