[open-literature] Panton Principles for Humanities

[James Harriman-Smith]

Dear All,

Over the last few weeks, we've been working on adapting the Panton
Principles (a set of guidelines for encouraging and clarifying the use of
open data in the sciences) to the humanities. We've reached a point where
we'd love to have feedback from the community, so please do read on and
email back to the list with your thoughts. I'll begin with the short
version, followed by an expanded text, explaining and defining our terms a
little more.

(the original Panton principles are here: http://pantonprinciples.org/

1 = "When publishing a work, an explicit and robust statement about the uses
to which all elements of that work (including annotation, introduction,
index, etc.) may be put."
2 = "Use a recognized waiver or license that is appropriate for that work."
3 = "If you want your work to be effectively used, adapted (remixed), and
added to by others it should be open as defined by the *Open Content
Definition* – in particular non-commercial and other restrictive clauses
should not be used." ( - make it into link to OpenDef pages)
4 = "Explicit dedication of annotations, editorial matter, etc. embedded in
the published work to the public domain is strongly recommended and ensures
compliance with the *Open Content Definition*."
5 = "Explicit declaration of sources is strongly recommended, regardless of
their copyright status, in order to foster a culture of both 'attibute' and
'share-alike'."

Version with notes:

1) "When publishing a work, an explicit and robust statement about the uses
to which all elements of that work (including annotation, introduction,
index, etc.) may be put."
- The original Panton Principles talk about 'data'. We chose not to keep
this word as talking about humanities' 'data' seemed unclear and potentially
limiting. 'Work', a term already used to describe everything from plays to
sonatas, letters, sculptures and printed objects, provided a term both
recognisable to any humanist and sufficiently large to cover the scope of
potential cultural artefacts covered by these principles. 'Content',
although tempting, was felt to ignore such important elements as, say, in
the case of books, annotations, critical notes, printing and publishing
choices, etc.
- 'Work' also puts the focus on the 'finished' object, one that is
considered ready for publication (/performing/broadcasting/exhibition,
etc.). These principles are, after all, meant to guide those looking to
publish something in an open way.
- Finally, to repeat a line from the original Panton Principles: "this
statement should be precise, irrevocable, and based on an appropriate and
recognized legal statement in the form of a waiver or license."

2) "Use a recognized waiver or license that is appropriate for that work."
- Unlike those working in the domain of scientific data, some of the best
known licences are appropriated for work in the humanities. Creative Commons
is one, as is the FreeArt licence (see:
http://opendefinition.org/licenses/ for why.)

3) "If you want your work to be effectively used, adapted, and added to by
others it should be open as defined by the *Open Content Definition* – in
particular non-commercial and other restrictive clauses should not be
used."
- The Open Content definition is here: http://opendefinition.org/, content
is taken here only because it is the term of the Open Definition; it is to
be understood in the largest possible sense.
- "adapted" has been added to the original list of actions in order to
reflect the importance of being able to 'remix' works of art for new
audiences, a process, we feel, both good for the original artist and for the
adaptor.
- From the original version, we would also add that "the use of licenses
which limit commercial re-use or limit the production of derivative works by
excluding use for particular purposes or by specific persons or
organizations is STRONGLY discouraged." This point is particularly relevant
with regard to enclosure of the public domain, as practised by Google Books.

4) "Explicit dedication of annotations, editorial matter, etc. embedded in
the published work to the public domain is strongly recommended and ensures
compliance with the *Open Content Definition*."
- One additional point (inspired by the original principles), that this is
all the more important with those works that have been publicly funded.

5) "Explicit declaration of sources is strongly recommended, regardless of
their copyright status, in order to foster a culture of both 'attibute' and
'share-alike'."
- A greater uptake of SA-BY publication in the humanities will increase the
incentive for others to publish in an open way, thus strengthening the
position of those who have already done so.

Thanks for reading!

James

P.S. This will be posted on http://wiki.openliterature.net

-- 
James Harriman-Smith
Open Literature Working Group Coordinator
Open Knowledge Foundation
http://okfn.org/members/jameshs
Skype: james.harriman.smith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-literature/attachments/20111003/518a7c5f/attachment.html>