[od-discuss] Question about open data licenses

[Carsten Agger]

Hi Herb,

Yes, I was having that in mind and wanted to hear a qualified opinion
first. I'll write to them tomorrow and present my concern.

Thanks a lot for your response!

Carsten

 On 04/07/2014 09:20 PM, Herb Lainchbury wrote:
> Hi Carsten,
> 
> Not a silly question at all.  Thank for asking and for providing real
> examples.
> 
> We often see "any lawful use" style clauses and is a point of confusion
> so it's worth discussing.
> 
> These "any lawful use" style clauses are typically used in the context
> of giving a permission - e.g. "you are free to use the data for any
> lawful purpose"
> 
> While not strictly required for conformance, we recommend that
> publishers not include "any lawful use" clauses.
> 
> In our letter to the City of Calgary in September of 2013 we stated:
>  ""We think that the wording “any lawful use” serves no real purpose and
> causes confusion for users.  We feel that open data licenses are a poor
> vehicle for law enforcement.  Laws themselves define what is lawful and
> unlawful and come with appropriate enforcement mechanisms.  We recommend
> that this be removed.""
> 
> 
> I think the clause you state, "It must be ensured that the data are used
> in accordance with Danish law", assuming the translation is accurate, is
> different though.  If it pertains only to the original data consumer
> it's close to "any lawful use" but rather than a lack of permission it's
> stated as a restriction.  The fact that it's vague in it's treatment of
> who does the ensuring whether or not they are responsible for downstream
> users, is more problematic in my view so I think the concern is valid.
> 
> To your second point, "Should the supplier of the app be prosecuted for
> not ensuring a legal use of the data?".  With this license I would say
> it's hard to tell.
> 
> They likely intend the license to be clear so if it's possible for you
> to provide them with feedback about this issue they could very well
> agree and make a change.  I think the thing to keep in mind is that
> people are still figuring this stuff out so it's great to ask questions
> and provide constructive feedback to publishers.  In my experience they
> are usually appreciative of the feedback.
> 
> In this case it looks like they have done a great job in trying to make
> their license brief and clear.  Are you able to contact them and offer a
> suggestion?
> 
> Herb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Carsten Agger <agger at modspil.dk
> <mailto:agger at modspil.dk>> wrote:
> 
>     Silly question, maybe:
> 
>     Is it acceptable for an open data license to limit the use of whatever
>     it covers to lawful purposes?
> 
>     The question is about this license, by the Danish government body
>     Digitaliseringsstyrelsen (Agency for Digitalization):
> 
>     http://digitaliser.dk/resource/2432531
> 
>     The clause that makes me wonder is this:
> 
> 
>     "Det skal sikres, at brug af data er i overensstemmelse med dansk ret."
> 
>     ... meaning ...
> 
> 
>     "It must be ensured that the data are used in acccordance with
>     Danish law."
> 
>     Apart from this one clause, the license is a very decent BSD- or
>     MIT-style license that is fully compliant with the Open Definition.
> 
>     But I wonder if this one clause is a poison pill that they should be
>     advised to take out?
> 
>     Now suppose ... someone took property value data to make an app which
>     figures out which families may be rich and uses it to burgle them. When
>     they are caught, should they also be prosecuted for breaking the open
>     data license? They might, but it seems absurd.
> 
>     A second scenario: Someone makes another and perfectly legitimate
>     traffic monitoring application, and someone buys that app and uses it to
>     figure out when trucks carrying valuable goods pass. The crooks did not
>     make the app, which is legit. Should the supplier of the app be
>     prosecuted for not ensuring a legal use of the data? But how could they?
> 
>     Can an open data license contain such a clause?
> 
>     I'm thinking it might put limits on redistribution (since you can't
>     ensure how the recipient uses the data) and make the license technically
>     revokable if the law changes.
> 
>     Both of them would seem to undermine it. Or am I reading it too
>     literally? IANAL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     od-discuss mailing list
>     od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>     https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
>     Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
> 250.704.6154
> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 263 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20140407/a3f654b7/attachment-0003.sig>