[open-heritage] PSI directive & GLAM
erik.hjalmar.josefsson at gmail.com
Wed Sep 26 04:41:39 UTC 2012
It is my understanding that there will be a majority on one of our
amendments in JURI on Europeana style metadata licensing.
The sticky point seems to be what the public bodies
hosting/holding/producing the data are supposed to do with the money
they need/generate. As far as I can see this is a traditional left-right
issue, i.e. how is a "public body" supposed to be financed in the first
place, and also, what should they do? (if there are private players who
can do it better, why have a public body at all?)
In JURI, we have tabled an amendment re-cycling the principle laid down
in the Orphan Works Directive.
I expect negotiations on that issue, but the risk for MS competence
carve-out is huge (art. 1.5 ODW style).
The chart on http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/PSI_Directive is
awesome but please don't show it to MEPs! :-)
(if they knew, they will be expecting staff to deliver all reports in
On 25/09/12 10:13, Daniel Dietrich wrote:
> I am in drafting this.
> On 24 Sep 2012, at 16:27, Primavera De Filippi wrote:
>> Hi all, and thank you Javier for the wiki !
>> I think we should start drafting a document (1 or 2 pages) based on that schema so as to precisely express what we think is wrong about the current proposal for the PSI.
>> I'm happy to work on it if anyone else volunteers to do it with me :)
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Javier Ruiz<javier at openrightsgroup.org> wrote:
>> Javier Ruiz
>> javier at openrightsgroup.org
>> +44(0)7877 911 412
>> On Monday, 24 September 2012 at 10:27, Alek Tarkowski wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>> Maybe we could collect all this information (links, documents, comments)
>>> in one place - on some pad or wiki? Any ideas where we could host this?
>>> On 21/09/12 12:59 , Primavera De Filippi wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> after the workshop last wednesday, we started to work on identifying
>>>> the issues of the proposed PSI directive as regards GLAM institutions.
>>>> Find attached the schematic representation of our preliminary analysis
>>>> based on the danish compromise version (attached). We would love to
>>>> hear comments or feedback about how to improve it.
>>>> We have set up a little task-force of people interested in drafting a
>>>> document (rather short) describing the identified problems, we would
>>>> like to know if anyone is willing to join us.
>>>> The goal would be that Communia would then take action into
>>>> influencing the amendment process for the directive.
>>>> Also, if you are in contact with local MEPs or national negotiating
>>>> teams in the Council, please let us know if you would be able to help
>>>> circulate the document.
>>>> We also need to know the deadlines to send comments - Erik and Amelia
>>>> have been really helpful at providing information concerning the
>>>> process, but we need the exact timelines to coordinate our actions.
>>>> Useful links:
>>> dr Alek Tarkowski
>>> koordynator / public lead
>>> Creative Commons Polska / Poland
>>> www: http://creativecommons.pl
>>> identica: http://identi.ca/alek
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/atarkowski
>>> open-glam mailing list
>>> open-glam at lists.okfn.org
>> open-glam mailing list
>> open-glam at lists.okfn.org
More information about the open-glam