[pdb-discuss] Draft funding proposal

[Rufus Pollock]

Michael Holloway wrote:
> Hey
> 
> This draft will eventually go the LDA. Comments pls and thanks, in 
> particular on
> 
> 1. Should the focus be on sound recordings rather than 'all categories 
> of copyright subject matter'?

I agree with Tim's comments on this item.

> 2. I have noted intention to become self-funding after 6 months, but 
> have not included suggestions for income.

Again Tim made good comments. Advertising/Sponsorship ...

> 3. Should we specify what data we already have?

I'm not sure they'll want details but you could state something like 
'Over 1GB of raw data'.

> PD Works
> (Draft funding application for £5k from the LDA to develop PD Works)
> 
> Summary
> 
> A LDA grant of £5,000 will enable the Open Rights Group and the Open 
> Knowledge Foundation to develop a scaleable database of authors and 
> works for the purpose of identifying their copyright status and contact 
> details for the right holder. This project will encourage creative and 
> profitable reuse of public domain works, especially sound recordings, 
> and the public understanding of copyright balance. 
> 
> Who we are
> 
> This proposal is jointly presented by the Open Rights Group (ORG) and 
> the Open Knowledge Foundation (OKFN).

[snip]

> The OKFN exists to address the challenges of the Information Age by 
> promoting the openness of knowledge in all its forms, in the belief that 
> freer access to information will have far-reaching social and commercial 
> benefits. In particular, we
> 
> •    Promote the idea of open knowledge, for example by running a series 
> of forums.
> •    Instigate and support projects related to the creation and 
> distribution of open knowledge.
> •    Campaign against restrictions, both legal and non-legal, on open 
> knowledge.
> 
> Anything further on OKFN?

Please use this blurb:


The Open Knowledge Foundation was founded in 2004 with the simple aim of 
promoting (and protecting) open knowledge in the belief that more open 
approaches to the production, distribution and reuse of knowledge have 
far-reaching social and commercial benefits.

[might want to omit this item]

### What is Open Knowledge?

Simply put: it is knowledge that is open! To be more specific, by 
knowledge we mean any kind of content, information or data: genes to 
geodata, sonnets to statistics. By 'open' knowledge we mean knowledge 
which anyone is free to use, re-use and redistribute without [legal, 
social or technological 
restriction](http://www.okfn.org/three_meanings_of_open/). For more 
details and a really precise explanation of what this means see the 
[Open Knowledge Definition](http://okd.okfn.org).

### What We Do

The Foundation exists to promote open knowledge in all ways possible. 
Central to this is being an open and participatory community and our 
allied role as a hub and partner for existing open knowledge networks. 
Beyond this we work specifically to:

   * Promote the idea of open knowledge -- [what it 
is](http://okd.okfn.org), why is it a good idea
   * Campaign at the national and international level on open knowledge 
issues
   * Run 'Open Knowledge' events -- for example the 
[forums](http://www.okfn.org/okforums/) and 
[OKCON](http://www.okfn.org/okcon/)
   * Develop tools that help us and help others develop open knowledge 
-- for example [kforge]
   * Provide infrastructure, and potentially a home, for open knowledge 
projects, communities and resources -- <http://www.knowledgeforge.net> 
for example

Running through all of our activities is a strong emphasis on 
decentralized collaboration. In particular, our primary aim is to help 
others develop open knowledge rather than doing it ourselves. Of course, 
that doesn't mean we don't develop specific projects (for example Open 
Shakespeare) but we believe that the future lies in collaboration 
between a multitude of different groups and that no one group or 
organisation can, or should try to, "do it all".


> Background

[snip]

> 
> This is an unsatisfactory situation. The cost and time of ascertaining a 
> work's legal status is prohibitive: it stifles creativity that could 
> otherwise profit from the existence of public domain works.
> 
> (Paragraph on remix / reuse creativity, or are we keeping a formal tone? 
> Perhaps we can do this with a formal tone … )
 >
> Proposal
> 
> The PD Works registry is a database and associated web application. We 

I would always expand the acronym PD to Public Domain (since we're 
talking to those not familiar with the area). Also as title I'd either 
go for:

Public Domain Registry OR
Public Domain Works Database (PDW DB)

> will eventually store data for all categories of subject matter that 
> qualify for copyright protection, but have chosen to begin with sound 
> recordings (because of their popularity and the threat presented by 
> proposals for term extension). With this data it becomes trivial to 
> determine programmatically the copyright status of creative works. A 
> major aim of the project is to harness community and volunteer 
> involvement in finding and entering information, as well as in 
> determining the rights in a work. Accordingly the system will be 
> designed to allow decentralized collaborative contributions, in a 
> wiki-esque manner.
> 
> In order to do this, several facts about each work need to be 
> ascertained – the date the work was first published, the name(s) of any 
> contributing authors, and the 'dates' of these authors. In addition, it 
> is important, particularly in the case of sound recordings, to ascertain 
> the same information about any embodied or underlying copyrights.
> 
> This innovative project requires modest seed-funding to pay for both 
> back-end development of the database itself and front-end development of 
> the web application. Although this programming could be done by a 
> volunteer, professional development guarantees both timelines high

timelines -> prompt delivery and high ...

> standards. Both the software and data produced would be 'open' (Gnu GPL) 
> so that other projects, for example those working on orphan works, could 
> easily use and build upon our work.
> 
> Our backend will process information in pre-existing databases (e.g. 
> Metabrainz), as well as information made available especially for the 
> project (e.g. BBC? British Library?). Our web interface will include 

BBC (BL seems a no-no)

> plain-English literature regarding copyright's regulation of creative 
> expression, emphasising the notions of  'balance' and the public domain, 
> as well as extensive links to further materials, for both academics and 
> layman.

[snip]

> 
> Budget - see Becky's previous email

See separate comments to that email.

> Project staff
> 
> •    Nathan Lewis? – Python coding

Nathan isn't a python coder (but a Perl one) and has a full-time job so 
unless he is happy to volunteer I don't think he is the best position.

I don't think you need to specify exactly who is doing this kind of 
stuff at the time being (we'll recruit once we have funding). Perhaps 
just putting a project manager (yourself and/or me would be sufficient)

> •    Tim Cowlishaw? – Web designer
> •    Michael Holloway – Admin and marketing
> 
> Participant finances
> 
> We have a monthly income (from supporter subscriptions) of approximately 
> X, and monthly outgoings (wages and events) of X. ORG's current account 
> in April 2007 holds approximately £X.
> 
> Should we give figures for OKFN too? If so, Rufus, please insert 
> following the form above here.

Sure. We currently have income of around Yk a year and outgoings 
somewhat below this level. The OKFN's current account as of April 2007 
holds approximately Z GBP.

> Details of partner institutions?

I've been tentatively chatting to IP department at Cambridge about 
someone coming on as our pro-bono legal advisory.

~rufus