Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

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

cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: kyaw thura maung <tamutharlay AT gmail.com>
  • To: "cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-devel] cc-devel Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1
  • Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 03:15:31 +0630



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

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

You can reach the person managing the list at
        cc-devel-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org

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>
To: "cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org devel" <cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: [cc-devel] Fwd: [cc-staff] CC is hiring - seeking software
        developer
Message-ID:
        <CABGQpf7FRgctwCXSua8LB1XQp_kfcqk9TSorvuEhXjhgko9-DQ AT mail.gmail.com>
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>
Date: Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:33 PM
Subject: [cc-staff] CC is hiring - seeking software developer
To: ryan AT creativecommons.org


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

+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>
To: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Matt Lee <mattl AT creativecommons.org> 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>
To: "cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org devel" <cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: [cc-devel] ccREL question
Message-ID: <60112546-6F94-42AF-8D52-2118F6D7CE10 AT kl.nl')">60112546-6F94-42AF-8D52-2118F6D7CE10 AT kl.nl>
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>
To: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [cc-devel] ccREL question
Message-ID: <54FFCB06.4030603 AT gondwanaland.com')">54FFCB06.4030603 AT gondwanaland.com>
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>
To: Mike Linksvayer <ml AT gondwanaland.com>
Cc: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [cc-devel] ccREL question
Message-ID: <A08947E1-BFB5-41E4-BB91-F85585C619B6 AT kl.nl')">A08947E1-BFB5-41E4-BB91-F85585C619B6 AT kl.nl>
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> 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
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel



------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
cc-devel mailing list
cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel


------------------------------

End of cc-devel Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1
***************************************


--
Kyaw


  • Re: [cc-devel] cc-devel Digest, Vol 99, Issue 1, kyaw thura maung, 03/12/2015

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page