[od-discuss] [open-government] [Open-data-census] EU Consultation on gov data re-use.

Wed Oct 16 20:36:09 UTC 2013

Good question Augusto,

Perhaps this is something that might also be of interest to the Advisory
Council on the open definition...

Kind regards

b

________________
*Baden M Appleyard*
Mobile: +61(0)459 824 061
Linkedin: http://au.linkedin.com/in/badenappleyard

On 16 October 2013 22:57, Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi.
>
> A month and half later, I can see no further dicussion on this thread on
> the mailing lists. Has anyone contributed to or is considering contributing
> to the consultation by suggesting a recommendation of standard licences
> related to the Open Definition?
>
> I don't live on the EU, but I think an EU recommendation like this can
> influence open data licence decisions elsewhere in the world.
>
> Best regards,
> Augusto Herrmann
> Open Data Team - Ministry of Planning - Brazil
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Ton Zijlstra <ton.zijlstra at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The European Commission last Friday has opened a consultation based on
>> three questions the new PSI Directive gives the EC a guiding role in.
>>
>>
>> http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/consultation-guidelines-recommended-standard-licences-datasets-and-charging-re-use-public
>>
>> The revised Directive <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:175:0001:0008:EN:PDF>calls
>> on the European Commission to assist the Member States in implementing the
>> Directive in a consistent way by issuing guidelines on
>>
>>    - recommended standard licenses,
>>    - datasets to be released/improved as a matter of priority and
>>    - charging for the reuse of documents.
>>
>> The objective of the consultation is therefore to seek the views of
>> stakeholders on specific issues to be addressed in the 3 sets of guidelines.
>>
>> I think this is an important consultation, that needs a significant input
>> from the wider open data community.
>>
>> When it comes to licensing and charging, there is I think a significant
>> difference between established (commercial) re-users (which are sure to
>> respond to the consultation) and 'new' users of data. Innovation, societal
>> resilience and grass-roots effort is best served with getting as close to
>> the open definition as possible, whereas established players individually
>> from their perspective are best served by staying away from the open
>> definition: licensing and charging are great ways to put a barrier to entry
>> on the low end of your existing market or niche, and thus protecting
>> yourself from competition or challengers.
>>
>> When it comes to prioritizing datasets for release or improvement I, as
>> lead editor for the Open Data Census (http://census.okfn.org/), am eager
>> to hear your thoughts, and if possible welcome you to the Open Data census
>> workshop in 2 weeks at the OK Conference in Geneva (
>> http://okcon.org/open-data-government-and-governance/session-d/). To me
>> the datasets we currently track are 'infrastructure' (geo, spending,
>> voting, company register and such, transport), whereas I suspect that to
>> take on certain societal issues different core data sets are needed
>> (healthcare, education data, financial system, energy / water, etc).
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> Ton
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Interdependent Thoughts
>> Ton Zijlstra
>>
>> ton at tonzijlstra.eu
>> +31-6-34489360
>>
>> http://zylstra.org/blog
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Open-data-census mailing list
>> Open-data-census at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-data-census
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-government mailing list
> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-government
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20131017/1294692c/attachment.html>