[odc-discuss] naming the new license - any ideas?

Mon May 3 10:44:49 UTC 2010

Dear Esther

Do you have an English version of the Data Licence attached to your previous email?

Many thanks

Francesca

From: odc-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org [mailto:odc-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of E. Hoorn
Sent: 22 April 2010 13:31
To: rufus.pollock at okfn.org
Cc: odc-discuss
Subject: Re: [odc-discuss] naming the new license - any ideas?

Hi,
Since I voted, I want also explain my choice. Let me first say that I really think you are doing a great job with the database licenses. I hope you will enjoy the launch of the license this weekend at the OKconference.

Here in the Netherlands we perceive a great uncertainty about reasons to keep research databases closed. I feel these have more to do with funding arrangements and novelty. But anyway. For those of you who read Dutch a recent newspaper article on the matter is attached.

Attribution Database License ADbL
I am not a native speaker of English. My main objections is that it confuses me. You seem to mean: The attribution version of the Database License: AvDbL 
A scientist new to this field can also think this is a database in which the attribution can be registered. The name does not signal the intent of the license, as it leaves out the Open.
The name is not really similar in structure to the ODbL. Or the name of the ODbL should have been Sharealike Database License.

The ODC By:  Should it not be the ODbC By :Open Database Commons By

Best regards,
Esther Hoorn
Copyright Librarian
University of Groningen Library

Rufus Pollock schreef: 

On 22 April 2010 09:42, Kuno Woudt <kuno at frob.nl> <mailto:kuno at frob.nl>  wrote:

	Excerpts from Rufus Pollock's message of Wed Apr 21 09:59:26 +0200 2010:

		On 20 April 2010 19:18, Jordan S Hatcher <jordan at opencontentlawyer.com> <mailto:jordan at opencontentlawyer.com>  wrote:
		[...]

			I don't pretend to be particularly inventive on license names [1] so this time we thought we'd solicit some input.

			I think I'm leaning towards:

			-- Attribution Database License - ADbL

			Other options being mooted are:

			-- ODC Attribution

			...and moving to a CC style elements of something like ODC-BY

		Could we have ODC-By on the list :)

	I assume the intent is for "ODC Attribution" to be the full name for ODC-BY.
	(in the same way that Creative Commons Attribution is shortened to CC-BY).

You're no doubt right -- should have thought more carefully there ;)

		The question for me here (and I think Steve raised this originally) is
		keeping some consistency in naming. If we use ODC-{xx} here should we
		not move to it for the other licenses? (Which is difficult given they
		are already out there ...).

	How many more licenses does ODC intend to create?  I assume these two will
	be it for now, but if not.. then it does make sense to think about the
	branding of the whole family of licenses now (when there is just one
	license actually in use).

I think the plan is for this to be it for now -- as per previous
discussion there aren't plan to do licenses with e.g. non-commercial
or no-derivatives conditions as this would make the licenses non
compliant with <http://opendefinition.org/> <http://opendefinition.org/> .

[snip]

Rufus

_______________________________________________
odc-discuss mailing list
odc-discuss at lists.okfn.org
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/odc-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/odc-discuss/attachments/20100503/c34f5511/attachment.html>