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

Fri Feb 8 14:50:44 UTC 2013

On 8 February 2013 09:30, Anthony Beck <A.R.Beck at leeds.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Lastly, I'd prefer it if the document were signed personally, only insofar
> as OKFN is an open forum and there is no established mechanism in place to
> gauge either how many people are in fact being consulted, or what ratio of
> them are actually in support. A claim of 'tacit' agreement by known
> contributors would be both unfair on them and weaken the status of the
> document.
>
> Fair point. The text can be easily changed to directly represent the
> signatories. Best to do this once we've decided where else to circulate
> (Antiquist/ADS others) - Broader distribution obviously has time
> implications
>
>
For what its worth - I don't think it would be an issue to include the Open
Knowledge Foundation as an organisational signatory for this (or to say
that the document originated from the OKF Archeology Working Group). In any
case I've signed the document.

-- 
Jonathan Gray <http://jonathangray.org/> | @jwyg <http://twitter.com/jwyg>
Director of Policy and Ideas
The Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org/> |
@okfn<http://twitter.com/okfn>
Support our work: okfn.org/support
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-archaeology/attachments/20130208/03db9e6d/attachment.html>