<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
On 30/07/14 12:42, Doug Rocks-Macqueen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:SNT146-W16496FA041510A0AB6C9B6B0F90@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div>"We also don't see much advantage over our current license
to the CC ones, other than a small group of people being able
to take data we host and re-sell it."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So I have a general question for everyone- Are there
individuals or organisations that take archaeology data and
re-sell it?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
We've had one known instance of our data being bundled up and sold
on CDs to metal detectorists, which led us to invoke our T&Cs to
stop them doing that. We would have been fine with them giving
those CDs away for free, and would have hoped any new data
discovered using that data would then be made free & open for
the community as per our T&Cs.<br>
<br>
The only other time i'm aware we actually chased someone up for
circumventing our T&Cs was when a necrophilia website was hard
linking to images of partially decomposed bodies from a medieval
burial crypt [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5284/1000367">http://dx.doi.org/10.5284/1000367</a>]. I'm not sure of
the details as to whether they were also charging access, but it was
certainly a unique circumstance.<br>
<br>
The only other relevant situation that we are trying to protect is
in the instance of some professional photographs deposited within
our archives, such as ERA
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/era/section/gallery.jsf">http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/era/section/gallery.jsf</a>]. The
professional photographer associated with that project was happy for
his images to be openly reused as long as someone didn't take them
and try to re-sell them, which given the quality i would say is a
valid concern. Our T&Cs cover this in a way that CC-BY or
CC-BY-NC don't suitably address in our opinion. <br>
<br>
You are right though that the likelihood of re-sale of
archaeological data is very low, but most of our depositors want
that protection (for right or wrong). <br>
<br>
Just want to re-emphasise we are not trying to restrict access to
our data in any way whatsoever, and think our T&Cs alongside the
deposit license suitably cover our preservation activities while not
restricting re-use in any significant way. We want commercial units
to reuse our data and actively encourage it, and would never
discourage or stop them from doing so. As Stefano has pointed out
we fully appreciate that standardization is the way forward (we bang
that drum in many other arenas), but we do not currently see a
standardized license that fully addresses our preservation and
dissemination activities and concerns.<br>
<br>
michael<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
</body>
</html>