[okfn-discuss] License for GroupsNearYou

Fri Mar 7 11:26:33 UTC 2008

On 6 Mar 2008, at 07:10, Philippe Aigrain wrote:

> For pure data, the term license (in the sense of using a right to  
> restrict
> usage - IP title for instance - to create a commons) is not adapted.

I'm assuming you mean factual information when you say "pure data".   
I agree that if there is no underlying property right, then it would  
not be accurate to call this a licence. However, for a database,  
there can very likely be copyright in some aspect of it, and so  
saying "licence" is accurate. This can be true even if it is a  
database of wholly factual information not protected by copyright in  
the particular legal system, as their could be copyright over  
different aspects of the database.

> In
> Europe, the Database protection directive has created proprietary  
> rights on
> collection of data that do not meet the standard for copyright, and  
> some have
> suggested to use them for open licenses, but I think it is a very  
> bad idea to
> legitimate these absurd restrictive rights.

I don't think that there is a problem with using database rights in  
the EU for open licences -- if you don't address them then people  
don't have permission to use the data/database and so that defeats  
the purpose of having an open licence.  You can address them but  
waive or fully license them, or you can use them as a part of the  
approach for the license to the problem by using them to restrict (BY- 
SA for example) what happens with data apart from the database.

FYI, database rights and database copyright are not mutually  
exclusive, and it is not merely collections of data that get the  
rights -- there has to be a database.
>
> This was one of the reasons that led me to work on a direct positive
> recognition of protected commons where instead of using licenses,  
> people
> could say "I donate this to the commons", and possibly attach a  
> number of
> conditions provided they do not defeat the very idea of a universal  
> commons.
> Obtaining this recognition in international norm setting arenas is  
> a long
> process. So meanwhile one has to look for guidelines or ofther  
> contractual
> arrangements rather than licenses.

See what we did for the Open Data Commons PDDL and accompanying  
Community Norms Statement. This allows for a dedication and backup  
licence so that the work is as close to the public domain as  
(hopefully) possible, and sets out a non-binding set of terms for its  
use.

http://opendatacommons.org

In relation to your comments, I'm not clear though on what you describe:
> "a direct positive
> recognition of protected commons where instead of using licenses,  
> people
> could say "I donate this to the commons", and possibly attach a  
> number of
> conditions provided they do not defeat the very idea of a universal  
> commons.

How is this:

-- not a licence if database rights or copyright is involved?
-- is not at the very least a contract?

Also, what do you mean by "universal commons"?

>
> Look at Science Commons (www.sciencecommons.org) for some of these  :
> scientific communities often have similar problems to yours : they  
> produce
> pure data, generally attached with metadata, and often associated  
> with some
> sensitive usage (for instance for personal biological data). In  
> particular,
> you may find some inspiration in the HapMap directives :
> The Responsible Use and Publication of HapMap Data
> http://www.hapmap.org/guidelines_hapmap_data.html.en

The new Science Commons protocol would perhaps be the best starting  
place on their site:

<http://sciencecommons.org/projects/publishing/open-access-data- 
protocol/>
<http://sciencecommons.org/resources/faq/database-protocol/>

Thanks!

~Jordan

>
> Best,
>
> Philippe Aigrain
>
> Le Thursday 06 March 2008 00:21:29 Francis Irving, vous avez écrit :
>> What license should we be licensing the data on GroupsNearYou under?
>>
>> http://www.groupsnearyou.com/api
>>
>> What licenses for basically pure data, with a tiny bit of  
>> copyright in
>> the descriptions, are suitable these days?
>>
>> Francis
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> okfn-discuss mailing list
>> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
>
>
>
> -- 
> Philippe Aigrain
> Founder and CEO, Sopinspace, Society for Public Information Spaces
> 4, passage de la Main d'Or, F-75011 Paris, France
> Tel: +33 1 55 28 37 65 - Fax: +33 1 55 28 37 69
> philippe.aigrain at sopinspace.com, www.sopinspace.com
> ------------------------------------------------------
> SARL Sopinspace, Society for Public Information Spaces
> RCS 451 436 604 - SIRET 451 436 604 00016 - APE 721Z
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss

____
Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM

jordan at opencontentlawyer dot com
OC Blog: http://opencontentlawyer.com
IP/IT Blog: http://twitchgamer.net

Open Data Commons
<http://opendatacommons.org>

Usage of Creative Commons by cultural heritage organisations
http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/studies/cc2007