Over the next few months, we will start by asking our
collaborators to open source everything from Lydia’s
N-of-1— the process, costs, contracts, protocols,
assays, cell lines and data.The only bit that seems like open source is "anyone performing an N-of-1 should be able to tap into this repository as long as they contribute back into it", which implies a share-alike kind of license. Not sure how copyrightable this type of thing is though, so it might be just reliant on good will.
I think the title is total clickbait and not what's happening at all.
If they licensed their Baby's DNA under some open source license then maybe we could say that they were open sourcing their baby, but:
- Don't think that is what they were doing.
- Not sure they own the copyright of their baby's DNA.
- Don't think that would be legal to do.
It isn't a journalistic article and so the writer should be forgiven for using a touch of their creativity with the title. Had this been from a news organization I would probably feel rather differently.