[open-archaeology] Open Data Licences and the Heritage Lottery Fund (great guidance but recommend the NC clause) - lobbying activity

Fri Feb 8 13:54:34 UTC 2013

Thanks All so far:

OK: Lets make the workshop generic (I will re-word - although if someone 
else dives in I wont complain)

PLEASE ADD YOUR NAMES TO THE LIST :-)
I will then make the statements about the signatories and not about the 
Open Archaeology group

Andy: comment in line

On 08/02/13 13:52, Bevan, Andrew wrote:
> I agree with Leif that it might be nice to move from the specifics of 
> the HLF case to the general, especially with regard to any possible 
> workshop. Moreover, strategically, it might also be best to suggest 
> that the HLF itself funds such a workshop as a continuing marker of 
> its willingness both to consult further and thereafter lead on the issue?
>
> Also, I vaguely wonder wonder whether the current document should 
> address the public domain/CC-0 style licenses vs attribution licenses 
> distinction a little bit more? Many would argue that the former is the 
> only clear-cut way to avoid some of the data fragmentation issues 
> raised, as even proper attribution becomes a tangle over the long term 
> (and despite automated attribution methods). However, raising this too 
> strongly would certainly be counter-productive as the important debate 
> is about NC.
Agree: I don;t want to annoy people at too early a stage
> Happy to sign up to this too if you choose to list people individually.
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Ant Beck <ant.beck at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:ant.beck at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear All,
>>
>>     TL/DR: We would like to influence the Heritage Lottery Fund to
>>     change their data licence from CC-BY-NC to CC-BY to stop data
>>     fragmentation. Do you support this?
>>
>>     I've been in communication with Lorna Richardson over the past
>>     few months about the Heritage Lottery Fund guidance entitled
>>     “Using digital technologies in heritage projects”. This is a
>>     truly wonderful and forwarding looking piece of work which IMHO
>>     opinion has a substantial flaw; they mandate that any content
>>     they fund must be made available under a CC-BY-NC licence. I'm
>>     loving it until the Non-Commercial clause.
>>
>>     I believe they have done this with the best of intentions but do
>>     not quite see the potential negative implications the NC clause
>>     this may have over the medium to long term.
>>     I have spoken to one of their managers and they are somewhat
>>     perplexed as to why NC might be a problem. I said I would get in
>>     touch with a number of organisations, get a concensus and then
>>     get back to them (although likely to be informally through Bob
>>     Bewley in the first instance). This is the first step in this
>>     process.
>>
>>     Together with Lorna we have created a document which outlines the
>>     impact of NC as we see it and have set forward some
>>     recommendations to try to influence HLF to change this clause (at
>>     least for the data elements - I do have sympathy with their
>>     arguments that the data creators should be in the best position
>>     to financially exploit the resources they generate particularly
>>     if this is images, video or books (but not data (I don't consider
>>     raw photos to be data per-se))). The recommendation is to
>>     organise a workshop (under the auspices of OKF or ADS??) with key
>>     stakeholders in place. The outputs can be used to catalyse an
>>     immediate re-draft or inform a future re-draft (depending on how
>>     they take the recommendations!).
>>
>>     You can find the document here:
>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nw8kwSYdcLgf_QFo5sugRgrwtDtYZomeJ4Sh9T-T46Y/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nw8kwSYdcLgf_QFo5sugRgrwtDtYZomeJ4Sh9T-T46Y/edit?usp=sharing>
>>
>>     It is open to edits and comments: please feel free.
>>
>>     Please be aware this is primarily of UK interest. However, the
>>     implications are global.
>>
>>     I would like to find out if:
>>     this document reflects the views of the members of this forum
>>     (i.e. can I sign it off as representative of this forum).
>>     how we can get OKF to provide support for this activity (someone
>>     with decent debating skills at the workshop with a rounded legal
>>     knowledge of the CC licences and their impact on the data landscape)
>>     which other forums/stakeholders to canvas (Antiquist/ADS, etc.)
>>     Views on stakeholders to invite
>>     Views on funding (HLF may not fund this activity)
>>     and obviously critique of the document itself.
>>
>>     I've pasted the executive summary below.
>>
>>     Thanks for reading this far :-)
>>
>>     Best
>>
>>     Ant
>>
>>     Executive Summary
>>
>>     The HLF have produced a guidance document entitled 'Using digital
>>     technologies in heritage projects'. This document establishes a
>>     21st century agenda for funding agencies by recognising the
>>     long-term role that project content play in science and social
>>     agendas. The Open Data in Archaeology working group strongly
>>     endorses this document and believes that improving long-term
>>     access to project content will have immense impact across domains
>>     and have particular benefits for engagement.
>>
>>     However, the Open Data in Archaeology working group has some
>>     concerns about the use of the Creative Commons by attribution
>>     non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) licence for all project content. Whilst
>>     we see the benefit for many project resources we would question
>>     the benefit of this licence for resources described as
>>     'preservation technologies'. We feel that whilst CC-BY-NC may
>>     provide some short-term benefits it has the potential to produce
>>     license incompatibilities which may introduce profound problems
>>     in the medium to long term. It has the potential to fragment the
>>     data landscape creating pockets of knowledge which are rarely
>>     used in mainstream analysis, research or policy making. This will
>>     be further exacerbated when automated data aggregation and
>>     analysis systems become the norm. We believe that such
>>     fragmentation goes against the intent of the HLF document which
>>     is clearly focused on accessibility, engagement and enjoyment by all.
>>
>>     We would like to engage in further discussion with the HLF on
>>     these issues and propose that a workshop is established to bring
>>     together the major re-use stakeholders under the umbrella of the
>>     Open Knowledge Foundation (who will provide legal, technical and
>>     practical advice on licence issues).
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     open-archaeology mailing list
>>     open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org
>>     <mailto:open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org>
>>     http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-archaeology
>>     Unsubscribe:
>>     http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-archaeology
>>     <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-archaeology>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-archaeology mailing list
>> open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org <mailto:open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org>
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-archaeology
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-archaeology
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-archaeology/attachments/20130208/aa4cf3aa/attachment.html>