[od-discuss] Are EC's legal notices for the new EC data portal OpenDefinition compliant?

[Jonathan Gray]

Not yet. I pinged them again recently. They are working on it...


On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Daniel Dietrich <ddie at ddie.me> wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
>
> any updates on this?
>
> Daniel
>
>
> On 10 Jan 2013, at 23:08, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org> wrote:
>
> > Thanks guys. We'll relate these evaluations to our contacts at the EC.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org>
> wrote:
> > > As some of you may have seen, the EC recently released a new data
> portal for
> > > datasets generated and collected by European bodies [1].
> > >
> > > In addition to CC-BY there are two other legal noticed in effect, the
> > > general Europa Legal Notice [2] and the Eurostat Copyright Policy [3].
> >
> > "In effect" is kind of vague. AFAICT, there are datasets under CC-BY,
> > datasets under the Europa Legal Notice, datasets under the Eurostat
> > Copyright Policy, and then there's the rest of the site besides the
> > datasets themselves, which would be under the Europa Legal Notice.
> >
> > Datasets are labeled, eg
> >
> > CC BY
> http://open-data.europa.eu/open-data/data/dataset/tKTZJMKxkcTKAPLvKninnQ
> > ELN
> http://open-data.europa.eu/open-data/data/dataset/WyiRNr2TYGsWp6xkq9A
> > ECP
> http://open-data.europa.eu/open-data/data/dataset/00YYPa7FUadFAd4HH4quTw
> >
> > Vast majority of currently available datasets must be ECP per
> > http://open-data.europa.eu/open-data/data/publisher
> >
> > BTW, I tried to discover all licenses used for datasets on the portal,
> > but it looks like license is tracked by the CMS, not in their
> > triplestore; a query for unique predicates turns up nothing related:
> >
> >
> http://open-data.europa.eu/open-data/sparql?default-graph-uri=&query=select+distinct+%3Fp+where+{%3Fs+%3Fp+%3Fo}+LIMIT+1000&format=text%2Fhtml&timeout=0&debug=on
> >
> > That's too bad.
> >
> > > I'd love to hear whether people think these are compliant with
> > > OpenDefinition. I assume the first definitely is (it seems to be a
> simple
> > > attribution style license).
> >
> > AFAICT yes, see below.
> >
> > > But some people have raised questions about the
> > > Eurostat Copyright notice.
> >
> > There really isn't anything to question, is there? It's unambiguously
> non-Open.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Timothy Vollmer
> > <tvol at creativecommons.org> wrote:
> > > The open data portal relies on the reuse decision for Commission
> documents
> > > as its "license."
> >
> > I'm not sure about that.
> http://ec.europa.eu/geninfo/legal_notices_en.htm says
> >
> > "© European Union, 1995-2012
> >
> > Reuse is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse
> > policy of the European Commission is implemented by a Decision of 12
> > December 2011 .
> >
> > The general principle of reuse can be subject to conditions which may
> > be specified in individual copyright notices. Therefore users are
> > advised to refer to the copyright notices of the individual websites
> > maintained under Europa and of the individual documents. Reuse is not
> > applicable to documents subject to intellectual property rights of
> > third parties."
> >
> > It would make more sense if it read
> >
> > "... Reuse is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged. The
> > reuse policy of the European Commission implements a Decision of 12
> > December 2011 ..."
> >
> > As the Decision isn't a license, but rather a policy for entities
> > subject to it to implement. Do I misunderstand?
> >
> > > That decision [1] includes a provision in Article 6 that
> > > requires:
> > >
> > >> (b) the obligation not to distort the original meaning or message of
> the
> > >> documents;
> >
> > It doesn't require an implementation to require such a term; it allows
> > a implementation to, as a possible condition on:
> >
> > "ments shall be made available for reuse without
> > application unless otherwise specified and without restrictions
> > or, where appropriate, an open licence or disclaimer setting out
> > conditions explaining the rights of reusers."
> >
> > I'd guess "Reuse is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged."
> > is such a thing, with no conditions other than source acknowledgement.
> > That seems pretty unambiguously Open.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jonathan Gray | @jwyg
> > The Open Knowledge Foundation | @okfn
> > Support our work: okfn.org/support
> > _______________________________________________
> > od-discuss mailing list
> > od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>
> --
> Daniel Dietrich
> Schlesische Straße 6
> D-10997 Berlin
>
> www.ddie.me
> twitter.com/ddie
> +49 176 327 685 30
> ddie at jabber.ccc.de
> Skype: ddie22
>
>


-- 
Jonathan Gray <http://jonathangray.org/> | @jwyg <http://twitter.com/jwyg>
The Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org/> |
@okfn<http://twitter.com/okfn>
Support our work: okfn.org/support
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20130205/45a7e8e6/attachment.html>