The choice is open to the team, management and stakeholders as to whether an ADEV project should work openly or closed. While the topic might have been contentious in the past, open science is now definitely established as part of the R&D landscape (see 'Open source drug discovery -a limited tutorial', 2014, PMID 23985301 and 'Is Open Science the Future of Drug Development? . Clearly this document would not recommend a position on this, one way or the other, but some aspects can be pointed out. Small-molecule antimalarial research has become the poster child for this way of working and, as an example, the Open Source Malaria initiative (OSM) has already made tangible progress (see "Open Source Drug Discovery: Highly Potent Antimalarial Compounds Derived from the Tres Cantos Arylpyrroles", 2016, PMID 27800551, the In The Pipeline commentary and the ligand for OSM-S-38 in GtoMPdb). The key practical difference with open drug discovery is the deposition results as they are generated into an open Electronic Lab Notebook (ELN). This then gets Google-crawled and InChIKey entries can be found via a simple Google search (see InChI in the wild: an assessment of InChIKey searching in Google', 2013, PMID 23399051). Consequently, the project chooses not to file patents which leads to the following advantages;