Importance of true Open Data Licenses
Locked
Importance of true Open Data Licenses
 
|
In the summer, I blogged
(http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/07/its-not-open-data-so-stop-calling-it.html http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/08/what-is-open-gov-data-sunlight.html)about the importance of having a truly open data license, and railed about how the gaggle of Canadian cities that were busily being touted by the data fanboys were only releasing free data, not Open Data. I pointed out the risks to developers and SMEs, given the right to arbitrary banning from use of the data sets. Yet most feedback I got was that I was being a pedantic Open license fascist, and that the release of these data were more important than "getting it right". I think the latest news ("UK's National Rail Shuts Down Free Timetable App" - slashdot http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/02/2344230/UKs-National-Rail-Shuts-Down-Free-Timetable-App) and original posting ("National Rail Have Killed My UK Train Times App" http://mocko.org.uk/b/2010/10/29/national-rail-have-killed-my-train-times-app/) shows just how fragile things are when you don't have a real Open Data license. Read the article. We will be hearing more of these sorts of things. It is the future without Open Data licensing. -Glen -- - |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
I would just call you thorough!
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Glen Newton <[hidden email]> wrote: In the summer, I blogged -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen Newton
Le 3 nov. 2010 à 10:26, Glen Newton a écrit : > Yet most feedback I got was that I was being a pedantic Open license > fascist, and that the release of these data were more important than > "getting it right". now you can reply you were "pedantically right about it" ;) |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
In reply to this post by Glen Newton
the data licenses aren't true open data licenses. but. is it possible for the current licensing of each city's data to be "incorrect" or "short" of its aims, as originally conceived when motions were passed, et al? rather than arguing from a position of shortcomings (i am not suggesting you were Glen - i have not read your pieces), what advantages are inherent to slowly emerging agreements and the affirmation of 'true' principles well understood by Council, et al? in evolutionary terms, it is perhaps more effective to revisit the issue and have it looked at several times. this should enable managers of institutions to intimate the procedural values related to open data. from there true engendering of the principles becomes possible. i say this about cities. i'd likely say something else about federal levels of data, seeing as there are no internal parallels or partners in sharing those types of national data and hence less or no opportunities for adjustments based on peer consensus/revisiting.
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:00 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: Send CivicAccess-discuss mailing list submissions to |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
Here is an analysis from a ChangeCamp 2010 consultation on the City of Ottawa Terms of Use - http://traceyplauriault.ca/2010/07/21/changecamp-ottawa-2010-open-data-terms-of-use-session/.
Also, I have been working with David Fewer & Kent Mewhort at CIPPIC (http://www.cippic.ca/) since the spring 2010 on this issue. They have written a report which examines the Canada Open Data City terms of use and it will be posted onto their website shortly. I will let you know when it does.
The Cities recognize the shortcomings of their terms of use, have acknowledged citizen input and CIPPIC is doing a bit more analysis on some outstanding items and will be preparing a toolkit for new up and coming Open Data cities who will want to understand these issues and also for NGOs learning about user agreements.
I facilitated and convened a meeting at the City of Ottawa with the City of Edmonton; City of Vancouver; City of Toronto; City of Montreal and CIPPIC explicitly on the Terms of Use. The G4+1 as they are now called have this as a key item to address along with standards, catalogs and other outreach activities.
These cities are to be lauded for their efforts to get stuff out the door quickly, and especially for being willing to take a second sober look at their terms of use and willing to work with the results from teh CIPPIC reports. Should they accept the findings of the report, they will go back to their respective legal teams and modify their Terms of Use in their respective cities. The City of Montreal which is not yet an Open Data city was on that call and is benefiting early on from a more Open Government Principles terms of use license.
It is important that Open Street Map, Glen, and others on the list vocalize the issues they see as that knowledge then gets /or can get used to better inform decisions.
I took the issues identified on this list, comments on other lists, and literature primarily from Science, geomatics and Public Sector Information access to CIPPIC and to the City of Ottawa before the City became Open Data City and this is what has led to this very productive meeting in Ottawa a few weeks ago to discuss that item and the CIPPIC report.
As soon as the report is up on the CIPPIC site I will point to it.
Cheers
t
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Morgen Peers <[hidden email]> wrote: the data licenses aren't true open data licenses. but. is it possible for the current licensing of each city's data to be "incorrect" or "short" of its aims, as originally conceived when motions were passed, et al? rather than arguing from a position of shortcomings (i am not suggesting you were Glen - i have not read your pieces), what advantages are inherent to slowly emerging agreements and the affirmation of 'true' principles well understood by Council, et al? in evolutionary terms, it is perhaps more effective to revisit the issue and have it looked at several times. this should enable managers of institutions to intimate the procedural values related to open data. from there true engendering of the principles becomes possible. i say this about cities. i'd likely say something else about federal levels of data, seeing as there are no internal parallels or partners in sharing those types of national data and hence less or no opportunities for adjustments based on peer consensus/revisiting. -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
Excellent work, Tracey. Jennifer From: Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> Sent: Wed, November 3, 2010 12:15:25 PM Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Importance of true Open Data Licenses Here is an analysis from a ChangeCamp 2010 consultation on the City of Ottawa
Terms of Use - http://traceyplauriault.ca/2010/07/21/changecamp-ottawa-2010-open-data-terms-of-use-session/.
Also, I have been working with David Fewer & Kent Mewhort at CIPPIC (http://www.cippic.ca/) since the spring 2010 on this issue. They have written a report which examines the Canada Open Data City terms of use and it will be posted onto their website shortly. I will let you know when it does.
The Cities recognize the shortcomings of their terms of use, have acknowledged citizen input and CIPPIC is doing a bit more analysis on some outstanding items and will be preparing a toolkit for new up and coming Open Data cities who will want to understand these issues and also for NGOs learning about user agreements.
I facilitated and convened a meeting at the City of Ottawa with the City of Edmonton; City of Vancouver; City of Toronto; City of Montreal and CIPPIC explicitly on the Terms of Use. The G4+1 as they are now called have this as a key item to address along with standards, catalogs and other outreach activities.
These cities are to be lauded for their efforts to get stuff out the door quickly, and especially for being willing to take a second sober look at their terms of use and willing to work with the results from teh CIPPIC reports. Should they accept the findings of the report, they will go back to their respective legal teams and modify their Terms of Use in their respective cities. The City of Montreal which is not yet an Open Data city was on that call and is benefiting early on from a more Open Government Principles terms of use license.
It is important that Open Street Map, Glen, and others on the list vocalize the issues they see as that knowledge then gets /or can get used to better inform decisions.
I took the issues identified on this list, comments on other lists, and literature primarily from Science, geomatics and Public Sector Information access to CIPPIC and to the City of Ottawa before the City became Open Data City and this is what has led to this very productive meeting in Ottawa a few weeks ago to discuss that item and the CIPPIC report.
As soon as the report is up on the CIPPIC site I will point to it.
Cheers
t
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Morgen Peers <[hidden email]> wrote: the data licenses aren't true open data licenses. but. is it possible for the current licensing of each city's data to be "incorrect" or "short" of its aims, as originally conceived when motions were passed, et al? rather than arguing from a position of shortcomings (i am not suggesting you were Glen - i have not read your pieces), what advantages are inherent to slowly emerging agreements and the affirmation of 'true' principles well understood by Council, et al? in evolutionary terms, it is perhaps more effective to revisit the issue and have it looked at several times. this should enable managers of institutions to intimate the procedural values related to open data. from there true engendering of the principles becomes possible. i say this about cities. i'd likely say something else about federal levels of data, seeing as there are no internal parallels or partners in sharing those types of national data and hence less or no opportunities for adjustments based on peer consensus/revisiting. -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
In reply to this post by Tracey P. Lauriault
If you wish to involve OpenStreetMap then I suggest we identify what is required to find an appropriate resource. I am not an appropriate licensing resource but if I'm the only OSM person on the list I maybe able to locate one.
Note to Sam since it appears to impact several cities can we find some one or is it under control? Thanks Cheerio John On 3 November 2010 15:15, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
The process is moving forward and I am sure you will be pleased with the results. OSM folks the cities are aware that you are very vocal on this issue as I believe you have made your views clear to your respective cities.
There is no need for any further involvement for this part of the process, however, checking into your cities to find out their thoughts on the report once it is made public is encouraged. I'll keep you posted. Cheers t On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 6:14 PM, john whelan <[hidden email]> wrote: If you wish to involve OpenStreetMap then I suggest we identify what is required to find an appropriate resource. I am not an appropriate licensing resource but if I'm the only OSM person on the list I maybe able to locate one. -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 |
Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses
|
|
In reply to this post by Morgen Peers
I am supportive of what the cities are moving towards, and I am
sympathetic to the claim that this is an iterative and incremental process, and I truly believe that getting the cities to this point is a significant milestone. And they are OK calling what they are doing as part of Open Government. But they are not releasing Open Data. I also would have been happy if they had instead said things like they were "releasing data in support of Open Government". This is a true and valid statement. But as my blog entry requested, tt's not Open Data, so stop calling it that..[0] The license that the Canadian cities have chosen to impose is what in the Open Source world has characterized as the "free-as-in-beer" vs the "free-as-in-freedom" debate (also "Gratis versus libre"[2]), and has a long history (I am from the Open Source world: we have debated this issue for the last 25 years!) . Here is an example of a real Open Data license: the UK Ordnance survey license[3] is basically a Creative Commons Attribution (CCA) 3.0 Licence[4], and is a "free-as-in-freedom" license. Indeed, being this type of CCA license, "...This means that you may mix the information with Creative Commons licensed content to create a derivative work that can be distributed under any Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence". What constitutes Open Data includes having an Open Data license. The Sunlight Foundation definition: Ten Principles for Opening Up Government Information [5] is a good place to look. Let me put this in another way: a group of Canadian cities decide that they are going to produce an organic breakfast cereal(!). This is because a number of people have been advocating the cities to produce an organic cereal. On the cereal box it says "Organic". However, the ingredients list shows only 20% of the ingredients are organic. While it is true that it is a good step that the cities have produced this cereal, the advocates try and shut-down those in the community unhappy about the false organic claim by the cities, saying that they are naysayers and that "that's not really what's important here and they will eventually get there". The advocates also try and shut down those from the 'real' organic industry, who complain that the false organic claim is reducing the value of the organic brand and _confusing_ consumers. This is a contrived example, but you get the idea and the analogy is correct. -Glen [0].http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/07/its-not-open-data-so-stop-calling-it.html [1]http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/licence/docs/licence.pdf [2]https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Gratis_versus_Libre [3]http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/licence/docs/licence.pdf [4]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ [5]http://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/documents/ten-open-data-principles/ On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Morgen Peers <[hidden email]> wrote: > the data licenses aren't true open data licenses. but. is it possible for > the current licensing of each city's data to be "incorrect" or "short" of > its aims, as originally conceived when motions were passed, et al? rather > than arguing from a position of shortcomings (i am not suggesting you were > Glen - i have not read your pieces), what advantages are inherent to slowly > emerging agreements and the affirmation of 'true' principles well understood > by Council, et al? in evolutionary terms, it is perhaps more effective to > revisit the issue and have it looked at several times. this should enable > managers of institutions to intimate the procedural values related to open > data. from there true engendering of the principles becomes possible. i say > this about cities. i'd likely say something else about federal levels of > data, seeing as there are no internal parallels or partners in sharing those > types of national data and hence less or no opportunities for adjustments > based on peer consensus/revisiting. > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:00 PM, > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Send CivicAccess-discuss mailing list submissions to >> [hidden email] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [hidden email] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [hidden email] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of CivicAccess-discuss digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Nature: Researchers launch hunt for endangered data >> (Tracey P. Lauriault) >> 2. Re: Nature: Researchers launch hunt for endangered data >> (Glen Newton) >> 3. Importance of true Open Data Licenses (Glen Newton) >> 4. Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses (Tracey P. Lauriault) >> 5. Re: Importance of true Open Data Licenses (Karl Dubost) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:10:43 -0400 >> From: "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> >> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> >> Subject: [CivicAccess-discuss] Nature: Researchers launch hunt for >> endangered data >> Message-ID: >> <[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Nature: Researchers launch hunt for endangered data >> http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101102/full/468017a.html >> >> In Canada the story is the same. Research data have no home once >> collected, >> state funded research data are not archived, Library and Archives Canada >> does not have a data repository. We have a small network of repositories >> in >> some research libraries in Canada but these primarily ingest research >> papers >> and not so much the data. Funding agencies do not mandate data management >> except for the International Polar Year (IPY) project - >> http://www.ipy-api.gc.ca/pg_IPYAPI_052-eng.html. >> -- >> Tracey P. Lauriault >> 613-234-2805 >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20101103/804dca08/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:03:00 -0400 >> From: Glen Newton <[hidden email]> >> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> >> Cc: "Broome, John" <[hidden email]>, "Zborowski, Mary" >> <[hidden email]> >> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Nature: Researchers launch hunt for >> endangered data >> Message-ID: >> <AANLkTimEo8Obi8zhs+Mx=[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Yes, this is excellent news! >> >> This initiative was supported by the Canadian National Committee for >> CODATA (http://www.codata.org/canada/) [I am a CNC/CODATA committee >> member]. One of the drivers behind this project (Elizabeth Griffith) >> is a Canadian: >> "The inventory is the brainchild of Elizabeth Griffin, an astronomer >> at the [NRC] Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics in Victoria, Canada, >> and William Anderson, an information specialist at the University of >> Texas at Austin and an associate editor of the Data Science Journal. >> Both will serve on the task group with ten other scientists. " >> >> CNC/CODATA is always looking for individuals and organizations for >> collaboration, and participation at our annual meeting. If you are >> interested, please contact me or John Broome (Chair) or Mary Zborowski >> (Executive Secretary) [hidden email] >> >> Glen Newton >> http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/ >> Scientific Digital Archiving & Software Consultant >> >> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> > Nature: Researchers launch hunt for endangered data >> > http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101102/full/468017a.html >> > >> > In Canada the story is the same.? Research data have no home once >> > collected, >> > state funded research data are not archived, Library and Archives Canada >> > does not have a data repository.? We have a small network of >> > repositories in >> > some research libraries in Canada but these primarily ingest research >> > papers >> > and not so much the data.? Funding agencies do not mandate data >> > management >> > except for the International Polar Year (IPY) project - >> > http://www.ipy-api.gc.ca/pg_IPYAPI_052-eng.html. >> > -- >> > Tracey P. Lauriault >> > 613-234-2805 >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> - >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:26:34 -0400 >> From: Glen Newton <[hidden email]> >> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]>, GOSLING >> members in Ottawa <[hidden email]> >> Subject: [CivicAccess-discuss] Importance of true Open Data Licenses >> Message-ID: >> <[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> In the summer, I blogged >> >> (http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/07/its-not-open-data-so-stop-calling-it.html >> >> http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/08/what-is-open-gov-data-sunlight.html)about >> the importance of having a truly open data license, and railed about >> how the gaggle of Canadian cities that were busily being touted by the >> data fanboys were only releasing free data, not Open Data. I pointed >> out the risks to developers and SMEs, given the right to arbitrary >> banning from use of the data sets. >> Yet most feedback I got was that I was being a pedantic Open license >> fascist, and that the release of these data were more important than >> "getting it right". >> >> I think the latest news ("UK's National Rail Shuts Down Free Timetable >> App" - slashdot >> >> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/02/2344230/UKs-National-Rail-Shuts-Down-Free-Timetable-App) >> and original posting ("National Rail Have Killed My UK Train Times >> App" >> http://mocko.org.uk/b/2010/10/29/national-rail-have-killed-my-train-times-app/) >> shows just how fragile things are when you don't have a real Open Data >> license. Read the article. We will be hearing more of these sorts of >> things. It is the future without Open Data licensing. >> >> -Glen >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> - >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:34:30 -0400 >> From: "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> >> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> >> Cc: GOSLING members in Ottawa >> <[hidden email]> >> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Importance of true Open Data >> Licenses >> Message-ID: >> <AANLkTincZry9px28GFo=[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> I would just call you thorough! >> >> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Glen Newton <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> >> > In the summer, I blogged >> > ( >> > >> > http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/07/its-not-open-data-so-stop-calling-it.html >> > >> > >> > http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/08/what-is-open-gov-data-sunlight.html)about<http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/2010/08/what-is-open-gov-data-sunlight.html%29about> >> > the importance of having a truly open data license, and railed about >> > how the gaggle of Canadian cities that were busily being touted by the >> > data fanboys were only releasing free data, not Open Data. I pointed >> > out the risks to developers and SMEs, given the right to arbitrary >> > banning from use of the data sets. >> > Yet most feedback I got was that I was being a pedantic Open license >> > fascist, and that the release of these data were more important than >> > "getting it right". >> > >> > I think the latest news ("UK's National Rail Shuts Down Free Timetable >> > App" - slashdot >> > >> > >> > http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/02/2344230/UKs-National-Rail-Shuts-Down-Free-Timetable-App >> > ) >> > and original posting ("National Rail Have Killed My UK Train Times >> > App" >> > >> > http://mocko.org.uk/b/2010/10/29/national-rail-have-killed-my-train-times-app/ >> > ) >> > shows just how fragile things are when you don't have a real Open Data >> > license. Read the article. We will be hearing more of these sorts of >> > things. It is the future without Open Data licensing. >> > >> > -Glen >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > - >> > _______________________________________________ >> > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Tracey P. Lauriault >> 613-234-2805 >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20101103/7b59e416/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:46:15 -0400 >> From: Karl Dubost <[hidden email]> >> To: Glen Newton <[hidden email]> >> Cc: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> >> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Importance of true Open Data >> Licenses >> Message-ID: <[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >> >> >> Le 3 nov. 2010 ? 10:26, Glen Newton a ?crit : >> > Yet most feedback I got was that I was being a pedantic Open license >> > fascist, and that the release of these data were more important than >> > "getting it right". >> >> now you can reply you were "pedantically right about it" ;) >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >> >> End of CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 40, Issue 3 >> ************************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss > -- - |
«
Return to CivicAccess
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |