[open-bibliography] Open Access licences and the OpenDOAR Policy Tool

[John Wilbanks]

Jonathan Rees is on the list for the Open Biblio Data and can walk you 
through the RDF side of things from a CC perspective. He's a principal 
scientist at Creative Commons and also sits on the Technical 
Architecture Group for the W3C, as well as leading the Shared Names 
project for stable URIs for data and metadata. He is the lead author on 
our recent white paper on publishing data papers.

Nathan Yergler, our CTO, would be the one to help you through 
implementation phases, web services, and so forth. You can also look at 
our developer wiki (http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Developers - note 
the desktop and web application sections, as well as open developer 
challenges) as well if you're interested.

Best,
jtw


On 4/1/10 8:14 AM, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
> I've got 3 cases I need to consider.
>
> First of all is our school RDF (FOAF etc.), 2nd is our school repository
> (bibliographic metadata)
>
> The biggy, however, is that the next release of EPrints will generate
> RDF automatically, and we want to provide clear an easy instructions on
> how to pick a license. Possibly, now I think about it, I might link to a
> page on our wiki so we can alter it any time as we learn.
>
> John Wilbanks wrote:
>> Christopher - we provide user support through our tech team for anyone
>> trying to implement Creative Commons licensing via web services. Drop
>> me a line if you're interested. We've been getting our services honed
>> through a variety of users rolling out CC0, including the Dutch
>> Government, and I'd be happy to connect you into that group of users
>> as well.
>>
>> jtw
>>
>> On 3/31/10 4:04 PM, David Shotton wrote:
>>> Dear Christopher,
>>>
>>> Reading your remark "but the license will not appear until they pick
>>> one.", I am reminded of the very nice OpenDOAR Policies Tool interface
>>> (http://www.opendoar.org/tools/en/policies.php) provided by Peter
>>> Millington to permit users to choose access policies for their
>>> repositories, of which I am sure you are aware.
>>>
>>> Last August I wrote to Peter about extending the OpenDOAR Policy Tool
>>> for assigning RDF metadata according to Science Commons data licences.
>>> He replied:
>>>
>>> Your proposed adaptation of the /Open/DOAR Policy Tool for licenses
>>> for depositing data in open access repositories is interesting
>>> and potentially of more general benefit to /Open/DOAR users. I would
>>> be happy therefore to provide you with the necessary PHP source code
>>> and advice.
>>>
>>> Well, this is not something I am able to do myself, nor have manpower to
>>> devote to at present, but perhaps you or someone in OKF or CC can accept
>>> Peter's kind offer and make something of this.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
>>>> Maybe I should just teach the controversy then?
>>>>
>>>> The decision for our local RDF data will have to be made "above my pay
>>>> grade". But I'll try to frame it as between public domain, -by and
>>>> -by-nocommercial
>>>>
>>>> I'm about to do the first RDF release of the software and today we are
>>>> running a training course in EPrints& Linked data at Southampton. Any
>>>> suggestions welcome! I'll happily add more suggested licenses to the
>>>> default release of the software, and a link to the discussion too!
>>>>
>>>> Partly, though, the data consuming community will need to nag each
>>>> admin
>>>> to add a license as EPrints 3.2.1 will provide RDF out of the box, but
>>>> the license will not appear until they pick one.
>>>>
>>>> Rufus Pollock wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 25 March 2010 21:41, David Shotton<david.shotton at zoo.ox.ac.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Christopher,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There has been considerable discussion, I understand, between OKF
>>>>>> and CC
>>>>>> about data licenses, which may be still ongoing. CC is now
>>>>>> recommending
>>>>>> their "CCZero" license for datasets, since this avoids the
>>>>>> potential problem
>>>>>> of managing the "attribution stacking" that would result from
>>>>>> automatic
>>>>>> data aggregation from several sources using conventional attribution
>>>>>> licenses of any kind. You are advised to take these arguments into
>>>>>> consideration before deciding what to do for EPrints.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I must say here that here at the OKF we really don't think that
>>>>> attribution-stacking is an issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> We are also consider attribution-sharealike type licenses as "open" --
>>>>> and Open Data Commons, which is an OKF supported project, produces
>>>>> such licenses. There is a ongoing, lengthy and friendly disagreement
>>>>> on this score between John Wilbanks and us on this matter (I can point
>>>>> people to more background on this if they want it :) )
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> For FlyTED (http://www.fly disagreement on this sc had long
>>>>>> disagreements-ted.org), which as you know uses the EPrints
>>>>>> software platform, we have, after discussions with John Wilbanks,
>>>>>> adopted
>>>>>> CCZero licenses for metadata and thumbnails, and normal CC
>>>>>> attribution
>>>>>> licences for high resolution images.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> We think public domain licenses whether the PDDL or the CCZero to be
>>>>> great too :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dryad (http://datadryad.org/repo), which is a repository for
>>>>>> datasets linked
>>>>>> to journal articles, has also adopted CCZero licenses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> That's great to hear.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rufus
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Dr David Shotton david.shotton at zoo.ox.ac.uk
>>> <mailto:mailto:david.shotton at zoo.ox.ac.uk>
>>> Reader in Image Bioinformatics
>>>
>>> Image Bioinformatics Research Group http://ibrg.zoo.ox.ac.uk
>>> Department of Zoology, University of Oxford tel:
>>> +44-(0)1865-271193
>>> South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK fax:
>>> +44-(0)1865-310447
>>>
>