[okfn-discuss] Data put under CC-BY in MashupAustralia competition

[Mr. Puneet Kishor]

On Oct 1, 2009, at 8:19 AM, Mr. Puneet Kishor wrote:

>
> On Oct 1, 2009, at 7:59 AM, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I recently blogged about the MashupAustralia competition, which was
>> announced yesterday:
>>
>> http://blog.okfn.org/2009/10/01/australian-government-releases-open-data-for-mashupaustralia-competition/
>>
>> The competition is putting out lots of open data to encourage  
>> innovate
>> re-uses - which is great news!
>>
>> Lots of the data is being released under CC-BY.
>
> I read this yesterday and cringed. "Oh no! another contractual quest  
> for recognition!"
>
>
>> On the competition
>> home page, Cameron Neylon raises the question of whether this is
>> appropriate for data, sparking off debate with Mia Garlick, organiser
>> of competition and ex-Creative Commons counsel:
>>
>> http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/09/30/your-invitation-to-mashupaustralia/#comment-1818
>>
>> Her basic argument seems to me to be that CC licenses are not "mere
>> (copyright) licenses" but are also contracts - in which case CC-BY
>> offers legal protection. Its seems that the rationale for doing this
>> is that government departments want attribution.
>>
>> Would be great to have thoughts and opinions of people here!
>
> Give a person a hammer, and all data starts looking like an  
> opportunity to get attribution.
>
> For ages now we have been creating knowledge in academia and giving  
> it away, expecting, but not contractually requiring recognition. The  
> norms of our disciplines have ensured that ripping off someone  
> else's work without giving due credit gets censure that is worse  
> than any contractual penalty could ever be. Ask yourself -- what  
> would you rather? loss of face or some penalty that your contract  
> provides for?
>
> Let's look at it another way -- if you have CC-BY data, and I take  
> it but don't give you any attribution (because I am just a prick and  
> don't want to give you attribution, and because norms wash off me  
> like water off a duck), what is it exactly that you are going to do  
> to me? Come after me with what? If your data are really worth any  
> money, sure, bind it in a contract and wrap it in a license and  
> track it with a beacon to make sure you get your pound of flesh. But  
> otherwise, it is just pointless.
>
> Let's not even get into the issue that contracts apply only between  
> the two parties that agree to the contract. So, if you agree to the  
> contract with the original data provider, and then give the data to  
> me without any contract, heck, I am bound by no contract at all.
>
> Isn't it just better to let the normative processes of our  
> disciplines, our society and tradition, guide our actions?
>

So, if not CC-BY for data then what?

I should have mentioned that I am in the "use ccZero or PDDL waiver  
for public data" camp. Licenses are more appropriate for creative  
content, and contract useful when you actually want something in  
return *and* can enforce a payback if you don't get the return.


-- 
Puneet Kishor http://www.punkish.org
Carbon Model http://carbonmodel.org
Charter Member, Open Source Geospatial Foundation http://www.osgeo.org
Science Commons Fellow, http://sciencecommons.org/about/whoweare/kishor
Nelson Institute, UW-Madison http://www.nelson.wisc.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Assertions are politics; backing up assertions with evidence is science
=======================================================================