[open-government] OGL-Canada proposal feedback from the Open Definition Advisory Council

Fri Feb 1 02:04:23 UTC 2013

Hi all,

Adopting an Open Government Licence is one of the two foundational commitments in the Canadian OGP Action Plan, adopted in April 2012 (available at: http://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/www.opengovpartnership.org/files/country_action_plans/Canada%27s%20Action%20Plan%20on%20Open%20Government%20-%20Plan%20d%27action%20du%20Canada%20sur%20le%20gouvernement%20ouvert_0.pdf)

Specifically, the Action Plan states:

"Open Government License: To support the Directive and reduce the administrative burden of managing multiple licensing regimes across the Government of Canada, we will issue a new universal Open Government License in Year 1 of our Action Plan with the goal of removing restrictions on the reuse of published Government of Canada information (data, info, websites, publications) and aligning with international best practices. In developing this new license we will also coordinate with other OGP members to allow more seamless collaboration across borders. The purpose of the new Open Government License will be to promote the re-use of federal information as widely as possible. It is our goal that federal departments will have adopted this new universal Open Government License by the end of Year 2 of the Action Plan."

So this is all very relevant indeed to our assessment of Canada's Action Plan and the implementation thereof.

Toby

___________________________________
Toby Mendel
Executive Director

Centre for Law and Democracy
toby at law-democracy.org
Tel:  +1 902 431-3688
Fax: +1 902 431-3689
www.law-democracy.org

On 31 Jan 2013, at 20:27, michael gurstein wrote:

> Thanks very much Mike and that does provide a very useful context...
> 
> I'm not seeing a direct link to our task of doing a review of the Open
> Government Partnership commitments (Canada) but maybe others could see a
> connection.
> 
> M
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mlinksva at gmail.com [mailto:mlinksva at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mike
> Linksvayer
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 3:54 PM
> To: michael gurstein
> Cc: Open Government WG List; od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> Subject: Re: [open-government] OGL-Canada proposal feedback from the Open
> Definition Advisory Council
> 
> I'm not sure what the OGP-C review is. Open Government Partnership?
> Would love to know how it fits...
> 
> Re the OGL-C feedback, a bit more background:
> 
> PSI licenses created by governments seem to be a growing trend last few
> years, usually with some problematic terms. OGL-UK is probably the highest
> profile one, and perhaps most interesting from an Open Knowledge Definition
> perspective, as it is clearly intended to be open, but nevertheless has
> problematic terms that we hope to eventually see corrected, and not
> propagated into licenses from other governments.
> 
> There's been discussion of these issues over the last couple years in a
> number of places, but two quick links are
> http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2011-December/thread.html#84
> (continues in next 3 months' archives) and section 7 of
> http://epsiplatform.eu/content/topic-report-no-23-creative-commons-and-publi
> c-sector-information-flexible-tools-support-psi
> which covers OGL and related issues, with footnotes.
> 
> OGL-C (based on OGL-UK) feedback period was noted at
> http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-government/2012-December/002495.html
> with substantial discussion at
> http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2012-December/thread.html#233
> 
> Link I sent is summary of feedback discussed last month, also submitted to
> the OGL-C feedback site.
> 
> I hope above counts as a bit of context, but please tell me if it doesn't
> make sense. :)
> 
> Mike
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:56 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>> 
>> Maybe others are more up to date but I wonder if you could provide a 
>> bit of context on this and also how/if it might fit into the OGP-C 
>> review. Is this an item that should be noted at all?
>> 
>> Tks
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: open-government-bounces at lists.okfn.org
>> [mailto:open-government-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of Mike 
>> Linksvayer
>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 1:44 PM
>> To: Open Government WG List; od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> Subject: [open-government] OGL-Canada proposal feedback from the Open 
>> Definition Advisory Council
>> 
>> http://opendefinition.org/2013/01/31/ogl-canada-proposal-feedback/
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-government mailing list
>> open-government at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-government
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> open-government mailing list
> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-government