[cc-community] New Science Commons protocol and the Open Data Commons legal tools
Gavin Baker
gavin at gavinbaker.com
Mon Dec 17 08:36:07 EST 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jordan S Hatcher wrote:
> FYI for those that haven't checked the CC feeds....
Based on the blog announcements, this sounds like Good News All Around.
I have some specific questions, which (if you think they're useful) can
certainly be made part of later FAQs for the Web site, etc.
> A new protocol for open data has been announced by Science Commons,
> with which the new CC Zero licence will comply.
>
> The Creative Commons announcement is here:
> <http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7917>
>
> The new implementation of the protocol is CCZero
> <http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Cczero>
>
> Science Commons Protocol
> <http://sciencecommons.org/projects/publishing/open-access-data-
> protocol/>
I found the Protocol rather informative. The "why" explanations in
section 5 are particular enlightening.
The name "protocol", however, seems confusing; it gave the impression of
a technical process rather than a legal one. May I suggest "Standards
for Implementing Open Access Data" instead? Since the document parallels
the format of RFC standards, this seems particularly fitting. It also
establishes the impression that these conditions are, well, standard for
OA data (e.g. if you want to do OA data, you should be using a compliant
license).
The Protocol mentions the "the Science Commons Open Access Data
trademarks (icons and phrases) and metadata". Do these exist yet? May I
suggest incorporating the Open Access icon developed by PLoS, seen here:
<http://www.plos.org/images/banners/b_soa_mar_01.gif> I'm sure PLoS
would license the icon for the endeavor, and it would help maintain
visual identity for the OA "brand", including a specific association
between OA literature and OA data.
Can someone explain specifically the relationship of CC Zero with the
Protocol? I get that CC Zero is meant to be compliant -- will CC Zero be
the CC-recommended license for data? Is CC Zero designed specifically
for data? Why have the ODC license?
Finally, there is a very useful place for this standard & compliant
licenses. I hope to see lots of adoption and uptake (I'm thinking
particularly of datasets generated from public agencies, e.g. mapping /
environmental data and so forth). But it's going to take a lot of
outreach to communicate a.) how it works, b.) why it's important, c.)
how to use it. For (b), I'm including topics such as those addressed in
section 5 of the protocol ("But I can't require that people attribute
me?!", etc.) and a fair amount of what the protocol alludes to as "false
expectations". I'd love to hear about what plans there are for such
outreach (and I offer my assistance :) ).
> The announcement on the Science Commons blog
> <http://sciencecommons.org/weblog/archives/2007/12/16/announcing-
> protocol-for-oa-data/>
>
> The Open Data Commons project, with the support of Talis, has also
> developed a legal tool that complies with the protocol that is
> available for comment. The goal of the Open Data Commons legal tool
> is to be fully compatible with CC Zero.
>
> The new home for the project is:
> <http://opendatacommons.org>
>
> There are two documents on which we would very much appreciate your
> comments:
>
> Public Domain Dedication & Licence (PDDL)
> <http://www.opendatacommons.org/odc-public-domain-dedication-and-
> licence/>
I couldn't find a summary of the license behavior. May I suggest this as
a summary (please correct any inaccuracies)?
The ODC PDDL is a license for data, data sets and databases. It creates
an equivalent of public domain status in jurisdictions where data or
databases have some protection in law, and makes explicit the public
domain status in jurisdictions with no legal protection. It explicitly
waives any exclusive privileges or claims of the author. As such, it
does not impose (or attempt to impose) any conditions on the recipient
of the data or database covered by the license, including any
requirements to attribution, remuneration, or reciprocation and any
limitations on use.
Also, the Science Commons Protocol seems to require the waiver of any
potentially applicable rights (unfair competition laws and contractual
restrictions are examples named). I don't seem to spot this in the ODC
PDDL. Am I wrong?
> Community Norms
> <http://www.opendatacommons.org/odc-community-norms/>
>
> Talis has put out a press release for the new legal tools here:
> <http://www.talis.com/platform/news_and_events/index.shtml#no054>
>
> We've created a FAQ for some of the initial questions here:
> <http://www.opendatacommons.org/open-data-commons-faq/>.
>
> A FAQ addressing some of the in-depth legal issues of the PDDL will
> be forthcoming.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> ~Jordan
>
>
>
> ____
> Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
>
> jordan at opencontentlawyer dot com
> OC Blog: http://opencontentlawyer.com
> IP/IT Blog: http://twitchgamer.net
>
> Open Data Commons
> http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/
>
> Usage of Creative Commons by cultural heritage organisations
> http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/studies/cc2007
>
> ____
> Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
>
> jordan at opencontentlawyer dot com
> OC Blog: http://opencontentlawyer.com
> IP/IT Blog: http://twitchgamer.net
>
> Open Data Commons
> http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/
>
> Usage of Creative Commons by cultural heritage organisations
> http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/studies/cc2007
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
- --
Gavin Baker
http://www.gavinbaker.com/
gavin at gavinbaker.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHZntHtLXQdLhFpekRAvLZAKCI0/AorfZ07n+FGgmDJBd7tbdVPwCglrUh
MVgUISKdvHv4a3CeQx/8E6o=
=LOa8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the cc-community
mailing list