[od-discuss] Comparison of OGL-Canada v2.0 to OGL-BC v2.0

Wed Jun 26 22:17:57 UTC 2013

Hi, David Wrate here from the Province of BC.

I'm trying to get a sense of whether we should be submitting the OGL-BC license for conformance review. With the exception of jurisdictional changes, the BC license is the exact text as the AB license and is already published. It appears there is conformance review underway for AB; would the results of that that also apply to BC?

I'm happy to provide a formal request, just don't want to add unnecessary grist into the mill.

Cheers,
David

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 13:44:54 -0700
From: Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com>
Subject: Re: [od-discuss] Comparison of OGL-Canada v2.0 to OGL-BC v2.0
To: Herb Lainchbury <herb at dynamic-solutions.com>
Cc: "od-discuss at lists.okfn.org" <od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
Message-ID:
	<CAGSmzpSR-J8HdBHnqiMcWAMo8LVWBXwycSifqUVtZ4uWpCTJBA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Herb Lainchbury < herb at dynamic-solutions.com> wrote:

> Since BC also launched their new licence last week here is the wdiff 
> of the OGL-Canada v2.0 and the OGL-BC v2.0.  These licences are very 
> similar but I wouldn't say they are the same licence.  Like the 
> Alberta licence, the BC license has an extra exemption which I think 
> is enough to say it's a different licence.
>

http://blog.data.gov.bc.ca/2013/06/british-columbia-adopts-canadian-open-government-license/
http://www.data.gov.bc.ca/local/dbc/docs/license/OGL-vbc2.0.pdf

As this BC is already released I'd propose holding off on a conformance vote until after we've done one for OGL Canada 2.0, or at the same time.
Comments http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2013-June/000488.htmlon
OGL Canada 2.0 obviously apply here

Is the additional exemption problematic? "Information or Records that are not accessible under applicable laws;"

Interestingly, BC also uses the spelling "License" instead of "Licence" as
> the other jurisdictions do.  BC also numbers their clauses.
>
> Other than the spelling differences and the numbering, Alberta and BC 
> are most similar in my opinion as they both have the extra exemption 
> referring to records.  So, they might be considered equivalent.
>
>
Agree.

> It's unfortunate that we haven't seen a parameterized license where 
> difference in name and legislation are dealt with in a definitions section.
>  Maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that would allow publishers to 
> use exactly the same license text.
>

The BC blog post above says:

The license is the result of public input and the governments of Canada, Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia and David Eaves <http://eaves.ca> all working together to create a license not only for the federal government, but one that any jurisdiction in Canada can adopt.

Maybe in the eventuality of 3.0, if it ever happens, the exact same text can be used. Worldwide? :-)

> Herb
>
> -----
>
> Open Government [-Licence - Canada-] [+License - British Columbia+] 
> You are encouraged to use the Information that is available under this [-licence-] [+license+] with only a few conditions.
> Using Information under this [-licence-] [+license 1.+] Use of any 
> Information indicates your acceptance of the terms below.[+2.+] The 
> Information Provider grants you a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive [-licence-] [+license+] to use the Information, including for commercial purposes, subject to the terms below.
> You are free to:[+3.+] Copy, modify, publish, translate, adapt, 
> distribute or otherwise use the Information in any medium, mode or format for any lawful purpose.
> You must, where you do any of the above:[+4.+] Acknowledge the source 
> of the Information by including any attribution statement specified by 
> the Information
> Provider(s) and, where possible, provide a link to this [-licence.-] 
> [+license.+] If the Information Provider does not provide a specific 
> attribution statement, or if you are using Information from several 
> [-information providers-] [+Information Providers+] and multiple attributions are not practical for your product or application, you must use the following attribution statement:
> Contains information licensed under the Open Government [-Licence-] [+License+] ??? [-Canada.-] [+British Columbia.
> 5.+] The terms of this [-licence-] [+license+] are important, and if 
> you fail to comply with any of them, the rights granted to you under this [-licence,-] [+license,+] or any similar [-licence-] [+license+] granted by the Information Provider, will end automatically.
> Exemptions[+6.+] This [-licence-] [+license+] does not grant you any 
> right to use:[+a)+] Personal Information; [+b) Information or Records not accessible under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (B.C.); c)+] third party rights the Information Provider is not authorized to license; [+d)+] the names, crests, logos, or other official [-symbols-] [+marks+] of the Information Provider; and[+e)+] Information subject to other intellectual property rights, including patents, trade-marks and official marks.
> Non-endorsement[+7.+] This [-licence-] [+license+] does not grant you 
> any right to use the Information in a way that suggests any official status or that the Information Provider endorses you or your use of the Information.
> No [-Warranty-] [+warranty
> 8.+] The Information is licensed ???as is?? , and the Information 
> Provider excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and 
> liabilities, whether express or implied, to the maximum extent 
> permitted by law.[+9.+] The Information Provider is not liable for any 
> errors or omissions in the Information, and will not under any circumstances be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential, or other loss, injury or damage caused by its use or otherwise arising in connection with this [-licence-] [+license+] or the Information, even if specifically advised of the possibility of such loss, injury or damage.
> Governing Law[+10.+] This [-licence-] [+license+] is governed by the 
> laws of the province of [-Ontario-] [+British Columbia+] and the applicable laws of [-Canada.-] [+11.+] Legal proceedings related to this [-licence-] [+license+] may only be brought in the courts of [-Ontario or the Federal Court of Canada.-] [+British Columbia.+] Definitions[+12.+] In this [-licence,-] [+license,+] the terms below have the following meanings:
> "Information"
> means information resources [+or Records+] protected by copyright or 
> other information [+or Records+] that is [+are+] offered for use under 
> the terms of this [-licence.-] [+license.+] "Information Provider"
> means Her Majesty the Queen in right of [-Canada.-] [+the Province of 
> British Columbia.+] ???Personal Information?? [-means personal information as defined-][+has the meaning set out+] in [-section 3-] [+Schedule 1+] of the [+Freedom of Information and Protection of+] Privacy [-Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21.-] [+Act (B.C.).
> ???Records??
> has the meaning set out in section 29 of the Interpretation Act 
> (B.C.).+] "You"
> means the natural or legal person, or body of persons corporate or 
> incorporate, acquiring rights under this [-licence.-] [+license.+] 
> Versioning[+13.+] This is version 2.0 of the Open Government [-Licence 
> - Canada.-] [+License for Government of British Columbia 
> Information.+] The Information Provider may make changes to the terms of this [-licence-] [+license+] from time to time and issue a new version of the [-licence.-] [+license.+] Your use of the Information will be governed by the terms of the [-licence-] [+license+] in force as of the date you accessed the information.
>
>
>
> --
> Herb Lainchbury
> Dynamic Solutions Inc.
> www.dynamic-solutions.com
> http://twitter.com/herblainchbury
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20130626/f6d02682/attachment.htm>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
od-discuss mailing list
od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/optionss/od-discuss

End of od-discuss Digest, Vol 32, Issue 31
******************************************