[cc-devel] cc-devel Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1

kyaw thura maung tamutharlay at gmail.com
Thu Mar 12 16:45:31 EDT 2015


On Thursday, March 12, 2015, <cc-devel-request at lists.ibiblio.org> wrote:

> Send cc-devel mailing list submissions to
>         cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         cc-devel-request at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         cc-devel-owner at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cc-devel digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Fwd: [cc-staff] CC is hiring - seeking software developer
>       (Matt Lee)
>    2. Re: We'd like your feedback on our proposed new   contributor
>       agreement for The List app (Ben Finney)
>    3. ccREL question (Maarten Zeinstra)
>    4. Re: ccREL question (Mike Linksvayer)
>    5. Re: ccREL question (Maarten Zeinstra)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 17:40:49 -0500
> From: Matt Lee <mattl at creativecommons.org <javascript:;>>
> To: "cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;> devel" <
> cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>>
> Subject: [cc-devel] Fwd: [cc-staff] CC is hiring - seeking software
>         developer
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CABGQpf7FRgctwCXSua8LB1XQp_kfcqk9TSorvuEhXjhgko9-DQ at mail.gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Come work with me :)
>
> ---
> Matt Lee
> Creative Commons
> Boston, MA, USA
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ryan Merkley | Creative Commons <ryan at creativecommons.org
> <javascript:;>>
> Date: Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:33 PM
> Subject: [cc-staff] CC is hiring - seeking software developer
> To: ryan at creativecommons.org <javascript:;>
>
>
> Hello friends of CC,
>
> We're doubling the size of of development team! With the generous
> support of the Hewlett Foundation, we'll be hiring a second developer
> at CC to work on one of our core 2015 strategic goals: improved
> discovery, curation, use and re-use of the commons.
>
> Please help us in our search by taking 2 minutes right now to share
> our post in your networks on social, or to forward this e-mail to
> someone you know who would like to join our team.
>
> http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/44802
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan
>
> New job at CC: Software developer
>
> Matt Lee, January 28th, 2015
>
> Today, we?re opening up a new job posting, for a developer. This
> person will work with our education team and existing technical lead
> to develop tools that facilitate the discovery, curation, use and
> re-use of freely available online content.
>
> The developer?s tasks will include the development of an online
> catalog of open education resource (OER) materials to facilitate
> discovery, curation, use and re-use, and content analytics. We?re
> really excited about this project, which will most certainly have
> applications across the commons.
>
> >From the job description:
>
> Creative Commons is a global nonprofit organization focused on
> enabling the open commons of knowledge to grow and flourish. Our work
> crosses multiple sectors of creativity and knowledge ? from
> photography, to music, to open educational resources, copyright
> reform, and open data. Today the commons includes over 880 million
> CC-licensed works, and we expect to pass 1 billion works in 2015.
>
> Are you excited about powering the technical infrastructure of
> Creative Commons? Learn more and apply.
>
>
> --
>
> Ryan Merkley
> CEO, Creative Commons
> ryan at creativecommons.org <javascript:;>
>
> +1 416.802.0662
> @ryanmerkley
>
> Please make a donation: https://donate.creativecommons.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-staff mailing list
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 19:09:22 +1100
> From: Ben Finney <ben+creativecommons at benfinney.id.au <javascript:;>>
> To: cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
> Subject: Re: [cc-devel] We'd like your feedback on our proposed new
>         contributor agreement for The List app
> Message-ID: <85egq6gkst.fsf at benfinney.id.au <javascript:;>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Matt Lee <mattl at creativecommons.org <javascript:;>> writes:
>
> > The List is a new web app and Android app from Creative Commons. We're
> > developing it in the open, under a free software license. We'd like to
> > get third party contributions, and we have an agreement that we're
> > proposing that'll do that.
>
> Please don't ask for a unilateral copyright assignment; not even a
> ?licensing agreement? of this kind. It is hostile to the level field
> normally created by free licensing.
>
> Instead, please just require that the work is licensed under the same
> license your organisation will be granting (?inbound = outbound?).
>
> More explanation of why CLAs are not desirable is at
> <URL:http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2014/06/09/do-not-need-cla.html>.
>
> --
>  \          ?What I have to do is see, at any rate, that I do not lend |
>   `\      myself to the wrong which I condemn.? ?Henry Thoreau, _Civil |
> _o__)                                                    Disobedience_ |
> Ben Finney
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 13:34:31 +0100
> From: Maarten Zeinstra <mz at kl.nl <javascript:;>>
> To: "cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;> devel" <
> cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>>
> Subject: [cc-devel] ccREL question
> Message-ID: <60112546-6F94-42AF-8D52-2118F6D7CE10 at kl.nl <javascript:;>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am working with a collections of international heritage institutions
> (Europeana and DPLA) that wants to make a clearer classification of in
> copyright right works. Basically we want to create a neutral namespace
> based on the Europeana Rights Statements (
> http://pro.europeana.eu/share-your-data/rights-statement-guidelines/available-rights-statements
> <
> http://pro.europeana.eu/share-your-data/rights-statement-guidelines/available-rights-statements>).
> Mapping this space of restrictions helps re-users find the niches in which
> they still use the tagged works and know when works will become available
> for re-use.
>
> The group is now designing the underlying metadata of these rights
> statements and are researching the use of ccREL. They have some trouble
> with the definition of cc:License. Included below I paraphrase their
> critique. I?m wondering if there is still anyone on this list that can
> provide some valuable feedback on this.
>
> > [..] cc:License really strongly hints at "real" licenses, while CC has a
> broader interpretation ("a set of requests/permissions to users of a Work,
> e.g. a copyright license, the public domain, information for
> distributors?.) and uses it also for Public Domain Mark (
> https://github.com/creativecommons/license.rdf/tree/master/cc/licenserdf/licenses
> <
> https://github.com/creativecommons/license.rdf/tree/master/cc/licenserdf/licenses>,
> PDM at
> https://github.com/creativecommons/license.rdf/blob/master/cc/licenserdf/licenses/creativecommons.org_publicdomain_mark_1.0_.rdf
> <
> https://github.com/creativecommons/license.rdf/blob/master/cc/licenserdf/licenses/creativecommons.org_publicdomain_mark_1.0_.rdf
> >)
> > This may make the choice of cc:License less natural for our audience of
> data providers and re-users.
> > The CC REL RDFS <http://creativecommons.org/schema.rdf> is also a bit
> contradictory, as cc:License is described as a subclass of
> dmci:LicenseDocument, which feel wrong because dmci:LicenseDocument seems
> more restrictive than cc:License (cc:License should just be a subclass or
> equivalent class to dcmi:RightsStatement)
> >
> > We sense that dcterms:RightsStatements is a better fit, but want to
> clarify ccREL approach.
> >
> > Related work:
> > ODRL uses odrl:Policy (
> https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/model/2.1/#section-2 <
> https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/model/2.1/#section-2>)
> > ODRS uses odrs:RightsStatement. Interestingly ODRS de-couple statements
> from license, i.e. it seems that in most case one needs one instance of
> each class, see
> https://github.com/theodi/open-data-licensing/blob/master/guides/publisher-guide.md
> <
> https://github.com/theodi/open-data-licensing/blob/master/guides/publisher-guide.md
> >)
>
>
> What does the list suggest we do in this project? Should we adopt
> CC:License or is it better to use odrs:RightsStatement or odrl:policy?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Maarten Zeinstra
>
> --
> Kennisland | www.kl.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-devel/attachments/20150309/a7f73208/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:56:38 -0700
> From: Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com <javascript:;>>
> To: cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
> Subject: Re: [cc-devel] ccREL question
> Message-ID: <54FFCB06.4030603 at gondwanaland.com <javascript:;>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> On 03/09/2015 05:34 AM, Maarten Zeinstra wrote:
> > What does the list suggest we do in this project? Should we adopt
> > CC:License or is it better to use odrs:RightsStatement or odrl:policy?
>
> dcterms:RightsStatement
>
> IIRC CC stuck with license/License for PDM when that was introduced so
> that the (mostly theoretical, and likely doing regexps on a page rather
> than parsing RDF) consumer would not have to know about another
> property/class. But arguably CC REL ought have been (or ought be still)
> updated such that cc:license is a subproperty of dcterms:rights rather
> than dcterms:license and cc:License a subclass of
> dcterms:RightsStatement rather than dcterms:LicenseDocument.
>
> Again IIRC dcterms:RightsStatement and LicenseDocument did not exist
> until 2008. Had they existed in 2002, I guess the vocabulary CC
> introduced (later branded as CC REL) would have used one of them
> directly rather than introducing cc:License. Which brings us back to the
> answer to your question.
>
> Mike
>
> p.s. I'm using dcterms: for precision and because I note the EDM
> document does, though one of my super tiny pet peeves
> <http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2014/02/04/one-dc/> concerns never using
> DCES 1.1 for anything (all its terms are mirrored in dcterms) and thus
> only/always using dc: prefix for http://purl.org/dc/terms/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 16:31:14 +0100
> From: Maarten Zeinstra <mz at kl.nl <javascript:;>>
> To: Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com <javascript:;>>
> Cc: cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
> Subject: Re: [cc-devel] ccREL question
> Message-ID: <A08947E1-BFB5-41E4-BB91-F85585C619B6 at kl.nl <javascript:;>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Thanks Mike!
>
> So you would actually advise not using the CC:License term in this case?
>
> Also a more general comment towards the CC Global. Do you have any
> interest in structurally pushing/updating CCrel or is it in your interests
> to not further that data standard?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Maarten
> --
> Kennisland | www.kl.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra
>
>
>
> > On 11 Mar 2015, at 5:56 , Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > On 03/09/2015 05:34 AM, Maarten Zeinstra wrote:
> >> What does the list suggest we do in this project? Should we adopt
> >> CC:License or is it better to use odrs:RightsStatement or odrl:policy?
> >
> > dcterms:RightsStatement
> >
> > IIRC CC stuck with license/License for PDM when that was introduced so
> > that the (mostly theoretical, and likely doing regexps on a page rather
> > than parsing RDF) consumer would not have to know about another
> > property/class. But arguably CC REL ought have been (or ought be still)
> > updated such that cc:license is a subproperty of dcterms:rights rather
> > than dcterms:license and cc:License a subclass of
> > dcterms:RightsStatement rather than dcterms:LicenseDocument.
> >
> > Again IIRC dcterms:RightsStatement and LicenseDocument did not exist
> > until 2008. Had they existed in 2002, I guess the vocabulary CC
> > introduced (later branded as CC REL) would have used one of them
> > directly rather than introducing cc:License. Which brings us back to the
> > answer to your question.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > p.s. I'm using dcterms: for precision and because I note the EDM
> > document does, though one of my super tiny pet peeves
> > <http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2014/02/04/one-dc/> concerns never using
> > DCES 1.1 for anything (all its terms are mirrored in dcterms) and thus
> > only/always using dc: prefix for http://purl.org/dc/terms/
> > _______________________________________________
> > cc-devel mailing list
> > cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <javascript:;>
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of cc-devel Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1
> ***************************************
>


-- 
Kyaw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-devel/attachments/20150313/77450c1b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the cc-devel mailing list