[od-discuss] ISO Codes

Tue Nov 18 12:37:06 UTC 2014

I don't think you can assume that a set of codes is trivially-reusable,
especially where the codes are linked to other information. Two examples
are postcodes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_code#Availability ),
where the Royal Mail UK has asserted ownership of Post Codes, and ACS
chemical identifiers (CAS) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_Registry_Number
, and state:

The assigning agency, Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Abstracts_Service> is a division of
the American Chemical Society (ACS)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Chemical_Society>; CAS information
is copyrighted by the ACS. Users wishing to incorporate CAS Registry
Numbers into databases should refer to CAS policy:

*A User or Organization may include, without a license and without paying a
fee, up to 10,000 CAS Registry Numbers or CASRNs in a catalog, web site, or
other product for which there is no charge. The following attribution
should be referenced or appear with the use of each CASRN: CAS Registry
Number is a Registered Trademark of the American Chemical Society.*

PMR: Identifiers are protectable by Trademarks and by Database rights (in
Europe). Note that postcodes and CAS identifiers are both continually
changing collections, while and iSO statement is frozen in time.

 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_Registry_Number#cite_note-6>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_Registry_Number#cite_note-6>

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
wrote:

> I always think this has been unclear, see e.g.:
>
> http://data.okfn.org/data/core/country-list#readme
>
> Which has:
>
> <quote>
>
> Nevertheless, it should be noted that this material is ultimately sourced
> from ISO and their rights and licensing policy is somewhat unclear. As this
> is a short, simple database of facts there is a strong argument that no
> rights can subsist in this collection. However, ISO state on their site
> <http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/country_codes.htm>:
>
> ISO makes the list of alpha-2 country codes available for internal use and
> non-commercial purposes free of charge.
>
> This carries the implication (though not spelled out) that other uses are
> not permitted and that, therefore, there may be rights preventing further
> general use and reuse.
>
> </quote>
>
> Rufus
>
> On 17 November 2014 21:16, Michael Roberts <
> michael.roberts at webfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Daniel Dietrich recommend I post this question here.
>>
>> For those designing standards or using ISO codes ( things like ISO
>> Country codes ) are we violating copyright and/or the spirit of things like
>> the Open Definition?  The reason I ask is on the ISO website it has a PDF
>> that says the following:
>>
>> http://www.iso.org/iso/copyright_information_brochure.pdf
>>>
>> "Whether intentionally or unknowingly, a significant number of standards
>> users are breaking copyright
>> laws by reproducing and/or redistributing standards. Contributing to the
>> violation of
>> copyright results in lost revenue for the organizations developing and
>> distributing
>> standards, which not only include ISO and IEC but also their respective
>> members and authorized
>> distributors. It also jeopardizes the standards themselves by putting
>> them at risk of tampering
>> and/or inadvertent modifications.
>>
>> ISO and IEC introduced online sales several years ago in response to
>> client demand for fast
>> and convenient access to standards. Unfortunately, ease of access has
>> made illegal
>> photocopying easier and Internet distribution has also increased the
>> potential for standards to be
>> obtained or distributed illegally.
>>
>> ISO and IEC International Standards are sold in order to help fund the
>> very process that leads to
>> their development. “
>>
>> Are we violating copyright by using them in the creation of standards
>> like IATI - which reference country code lists in the XML, not to mention
>> are posted on the IATI website. It seems like everyone is using them and
>> republishing them but should we?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
>> ---
>> Michael Roberts
>> Open Data Technical Manager
>> +1 514 802 9528
>> @michaeloroberts | michaelr at webfoundation.org
>> World Wide Web Foundation | 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington
>> DC, 20005, USA | www.webfoundation.org | Twitter: @webfoundation
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> od-discuss mailing list
>> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> *Rufus PollockFounder and President | skype: rufuspollock | @rufuspollock
> <https://twitter.com/rufuspollock>Open Knowledge <http://okfn.org/> - see
> how data can change the world**http://okfn.org/ <http://okfn.org/> |
> @okfn <http://twitter.com/OKFN> | Open Knowledge on Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/OKFNetwork> |  Blog <http://blog.okfn.org/>*
>
> The Open Knowledge Foundation is a not-for-profit organisation.  It is
> incorporated in England & Wales as a company limited by guarantee, with
> company number 05133759.  VAT Registration № GB 984404989. Registered
> office address: Open Knowledge Foundation, St John’s Innovation Centre,
> Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WS, UK.
>
> _______________________________________________
> od-discuss mailing list
> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>

-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20141118/45554ce0/attachment-0003.html>