[od-discuss] OD conformant proposal: Open Government Licence v3.0

Mon Oct 13 10:27:42 UTC 2014

Just following up on my earlier email and response to Andrew's specific questions.  We are looking to launch OGLv3.0 at the end of next week – 24 October -  but obviously we would like to have OD conformance agreed by then.  Is there anything else anyone would like to clarify so as to move this forward?

Thanks

Jo

From: Ellis, Jo
Sent: 30 September 2014 13:25
To: 'Andrew Stott'
Cc: 'od-discuss at lists.okfn.org'; 'Herb Lainchbury'
Subject: RE: [od-discuss] OD conformant proposal: Open Government Licence v3.0

Andrew

Thanks for your comments.

The change in attribution requirement was to protect Information Providers who have arrangements in place to license third party copyright information included in their own information which is then licensed under the OGL.  These arrangements would typically include a condition that the third party copyright is attributed correctly.  The current "practicality exception" means there is scope for users to omit these attribution statements putting the Information Providers in breach of their arrangements with the third party rightsholder.  This risk could restrict what information is released under the OGL.

Our intention was to add further guidance on the use and positioning of attribution statements – such as the provision of a list of attributions in a text file or on a separate web page -  in the UK Government Licence Framework itself and the accompanying guidance for users.

Does this help?

Regards

Jo Ellis

From: Andrew Stott [mailto:andrew.stott at dirdigeng.com]
Sent: 26 September 2014 14:53
To: Ellis, Jo
Cc: od-discuss at lists.okfn.org<mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>; 'Herb Lainchbury'
Subject: RE: [od-discuss] OD conformant proposal: Open Government Licence v3.0

Jo

Many thanks.

The Open Definition (v2.0) says “The license may require distributions of the work to include attribution of contributors, rights holders, sponsors and creators as long as any such prescriptions are not onerous.”

OGL v2.0 attribution had a “practicality” clause which helped ensure that the prescription was not onerous (although strictly that only applied to multiple attributions).

There is a risk that an “attribution statement” could be onerous – for instance by length – and the lack of a “practicality” exception could mean that some applications could not use the data because it was impossible to “include” the required attribution statement – for instance in a small embedded product.

I would also be concerned if “attribution statements” are becoming more lengthy and complex – the Open Definition strictly allows only attribution, although we have generally tolerated small additions (for instance to show whether or not the data has been changed).

It might be helpful to understand more about the type of cases which have proved difficult in OGL v2.0 so that those on this list can consider how those might be accommodated without making the requirement onerous.

You might also want to look at CC-BY-4.0 where there is a helpful clause:-

3(a)(2) You may satisfy the [attribution] conditions in Section 3(a)(1) in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material. For example, it may be reasonable to satisfy the conditions by providing a URI or hyperlink to a resource that includes the required information.

One formula might be not to insist on “including” but to alternatively allow a link back to a URL supplied by the Information Provider or the Licensor.

Regards

Andrew

From: Ellis, Jo [mailto:Jo.Ellis at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk]
Sent: 24 September 2014 20:01
To: 'Andrew Stott'; 'Herb Lainchbury'; 'Wrate, David GCPE:EX'
Cc: 'od-discuss at lists.okfn.org'
Subject: RE: [od-discuss] OD conformant proposal: Open Government Licence v3.0

Hi All

Thanks for your comments, though they have left me rather confused.  The link should take you to a "marked-up" version of the document but it appears that Google docs is not playing ball with me and so all you are seeing is the un-amended OGLv2.0 which is frustrating.

I'm attaching a Word version to this email which should show you the changes and answer most of your questions.  I'm not sure how best to share this with the rest of the list so if anyone who is more experienced in that than I am is able to suggest how I could do that, I'd be really grateful!

Regards

Jo

From: Andrew Stott [mailto:andrew.stott at dirdigeng.com]
Sent: 24 September 2014 17:16
To: Herb Lainchbury
Cc: Ellis, Jo; od-discuss at lists.okfn.org<mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
Subject: Re: [od-discuss] OD conformant proposal: Open Government Licence v3.0

Herb: thanks

Jo: is the main actual change that you are making then the parentheses round "where you do any of the above" please? That's pretty subtle!  The wording of the subsequent attribution instructions looks identical to me (and to Herb's diff).  Or is it in the greater distinction now made between the Information Provider and the Licensor - where for Crown Copyright the Controller of HMSO is the Licensor but not necessarily the Information Provider, and so it is the Information Provider's attribution statement which is the one that needs to be used?

Regards

Andrew

Sent from a mobile device: please forgive strange or inappropriate products of automatic spelling correction .....

On 24 Sep 2014, at 16:36, Herb Lainchbury <herb at dynamic-solutions.com<mailto:herb at dynamic-solutions.com>> wrote:
Hi Jo,

I notice that there are several references to OGL v2.0 where I think the intention would be for the this license to refer to itself.

For example in the attribution statement:
   Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0.

The other changes I see are primarily punctuation and capitalization changes.

One other comment I would make purely as information and it wouldn't affect whether or not I consider it conformant, is the convention around version numbers is that for minor changes I would expect the version number to increase after the decimal point.  So, this would seem like a version v2.1 revision to me.  As it stands, v3.0 would usually imply a major change.

I converted the license to markdown so I could do a diff to see the changes.  Here's the diff:

19c19
< * exploit the Information commercially and non-commercially for example, by combining it with other Information, or by including it in your own product or application.
---
> * exploit the Information commercially and non-commercially, for example, by combining it with other Information, or by including it in your own product or application.
21c21
< You must, where you do any of the above:
---
> You must (where you do any of the above):
23d22
<
31a31
>
37c37
< * information that has neither been published nor disclosed under information access legislation (including the Freedom of Information Acts for the UK and Scotland) by or with the consent of the Information Provider;
---
> * Information that has neither been published nor disclosed under information access legislation (including the Freedom of Information Acts for the UK and Scotland) by or with the consent of the Information Provider;
41c41,42
< * other intellectual property rights, including patents, trade marks, and design rights; and identity documents such as the British Passport
---
> * other intellectual property rights, including patents, trade marks, and design rights; and
> * identity documents such as the British Passport.
47c48
< Non warranty
---
> No warranty
68c69
< means any Information Provider who has the authority to offer Information under the terms of this licence. It includes the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, who has the authority to offer Information subject to Crown copyright and Crown database rights, and Information subject to copyright and database rights which have been assigned to or acquired by the Crown, under the terms of this licence.
---
> means any Information Provider which has the authority to offer Information under the terms of this licence or the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, who has the authority to offer Information subject to Crown copyright and Crown database rights and Information subject to copyright and database right that has been assigned to or acquired by the Crown, under the terms of this licence.
80c81
< The Controller of HMSO has authority to license Information subject to copyright and database right owned by the Crown. The extent of the Controller’s offer to license this Information under the terms of this licence is set out on The National Archives website.
---
> The Controller of HMSO has authority to license Information subject to copyright and database right owned by the Crown. The extent of the Controller’s offer to license this Information under the terms of this licence is set out in the UK Government Licensing Framework.

Herb

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Ellis, Jo <Jo.Ellis at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk<mailto:Jo.Ellis at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>> wrote:
We (The National Archives) are close to finalising what will become the Open Government Licence v3.0.

As ever, our aim has been to strike a balance between producing a licence which delivers open access in a clear, transparent way and which also protects Crown and other public sector interests.

The main change is that we have amended the wording around the requirement to publish an attribution statement to make it clear that re-users must include any statements specified by information providers at all times, even when they are using information from a number of different sources.  Other changes are mostly cosmetic and for clarification purposes.

All of the changes we have made can be seen at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C3jPK5U61GU6hMmrEQHJ-TuC8MVPn8ngodlexlQsuRk/edit?usp=sharing.

We believe that OGLv3.0 continues to be fully compliant with the Open Definition principles and look forward to receiving your feedback.

If you have any questions regarding any of the changes please let me know.

Regards

Jo

Jo Ellis

Information Policy Manager
The National Archives
nationalarchives.gov.uk<http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/>

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

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

National Archives Disclaimer

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the

individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and

have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email.

Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do

not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor

endorsed by it.

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

_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

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

National Archives Disclaimer

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the

individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and

have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email.

Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do

not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor

endorsed by it.

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

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

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

National Archives Disclaimer

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the 
individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and 
have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. 
Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do 
not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor 
endorsed by it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20141013/f6fb6e3a/attachment-0003.html>