This review hits it right on the head: this is a great improvement but
sloppy in not using Canadian legal definitions or terms not defined
even in other jurisdictions. Particularly egregious:
"First, “information” is defined in the licence as “information
protected by copyright or by database right offered for use under the
terms of this Licence” [emphasis added]. Since there is no database
right in Canada, it makes no sense for this term to be included (it is
also used in the definition of “Use”, where it refers to “doing any
act which is restricted by copyright or database right”). The
reference to database rights is found in the British OGL, since in
that jurisdiction there are separate database rights. However, there
is simply no reason why reference to rights that do not exist in
Canada should be included in a licence meant to be simple, open and
accessible. The BC-OGL, adapted to the Canadian context, refers only
to copyright."
Licenses that use terms that do not exist in their jurisdiction's
legal framework mean that interpretation must be done by a judge. This
fuzziness reduces the effectiveness of this license and increases the
risk of those using data covered by this license.
-Glen
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault <
[hidden email]> wrote:
--
-
http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/-
Locked
