Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-europe - Re: [CC-Europe] License Ouverte

cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-europe mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Patrick Peiffer <peiffer.patrick AT gmail.com>
  • To: Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org>
  • Cc: Paul Keller <pk AT kl.nl>, CC Europe <cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org>, melanie dulong <melanie.ddr AT gmail.com>
  • Subject: Re: [CC-Europe] License Ouverte
  • Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:47:24 +0000

Dear all,

Picking up an old thread: I have some responses from Etalab on their "Licence ouverte", a PSI attribution licence.

They agree that the lack of attribution requirement of a re-user B who got data under the "Licence Ouverte" from re-user A is a problem they haven't considered. 
However, if re-user A should change the data, then it is not PSI any longer and the Licence Ouverte doesn't apply any longer. As a reminder the underlying "rights" of the "Licence ouverte" is the French PSI law.

The compatibility issue was intentionally never fully explored. It also has never given rise to disputes. "Flexibility" was a prime concern for the "Licence ouverte".

As for the Strasbourg library using the "Licence Ouverte" for scans of public domain works, they say that for a public domain work itself the licence is not appropriate. But as the licence only applies to the scans, which are considered public documents and so PSI laws apply, so the licence use is legitimate (so it only works if the scanning organisation falls under the scope of the PSI law).

Since our last exchange I have seen the Licence ouverte pop up in Belgium and at OCLC (ISNI terms of use partially copy it).

So where does that leave the initial motivation of proposing some kind of "Attribution" requirement for the forthcoming Luxembourg open data portal, without having to resort to the "Licence ouverte"?
- I still see a need for such a contract, although it won't be ready for summer when the open data portal launches, which is not a big issue.
- I assume CC would not see such a licence as part of their scope as there is no underlying right. Correct?
- The Uni of Luxembourg has agreed to look into an attribution requirement independent of underlying rights (I don't want to be bound by national PSI laws or sui generis rights) that might give rise to an exploratory paper on the subject, if deemed interesting enough. Until then I agreed with Etalab to keep them in the loop.

Cheers,
Patrick


On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 at 16:49 Patrick Peiffer <peiffer.patrick AT gmail.com> wrote:
Just as a follow-up, I'm in touch with Etalab to elucidate.
Patrick

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 at 19:25 Melanie Dulong de Rosnay <melanie.ddr AT gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Patrick & al,

2016-01-26 16:51 GMT+01:00 Patrick Peiffer <peiffer.patrick AT gmail.com>:
Dear Melanie & Paul,

I am also interested in more information about the French licence, specifically any impact analysis regarding the choice of the "Licence Ouverte", but have found nothing so far. 

My motivation is that the Luxembourg government is currently building its data portal on a clone of Etalab's data.gouv.fr. (Etalab designed the "Licence Ouverte").

Here are some guidelines developed within LAPSI project you may want to send to Lux officials...

Deliverable of the Lapsi 2.0 European Thematic Network on Public Sector Information CIP-ICT PSP-2012-6 (February 2014): 23 (available at: http://cordis.europa.eu/docs/projects/cnect/1/325171/080/deliverables/001-D52LicensingGuidelinesPOAres2014499090.pdf).


 

What I believe to have understood so far:
- The licence is not based on copyright or database rights but on the the French law governing (some) public institutions (établissements publics to whom article 10 de la loi n°78-753 du 17 juillet 1978 is applicable). Not sure if and how I could understand this scope correctly

Yes, it's a PSI license
 
- This makes me wonder how compatibility with CC 2.0 or even Odbl is achieved. Even more puzzling

indeed. same for the issues you're raising below...
 
, the applicability of the licence is limited to the term of IP rights.
- The institutions in scope of said law are "The Producer" (the licensor) and they guarantee that no 3rd party rights exist in the shared "information".
- The licence only requires the first re-user to comply with its terms, who is not obliged to continue to share under the licence. The licence obligations are thus gone after the first re-use hop.
- The French BNU (national and university library of Strasbourg) is using the licence for its public domain digitised collection: http://www.bnu.fr/collections/la-bibliotheque-numerique/les-images-de-la-bnu-et-la-licence-ouverte
- The licence exists all over the place there is not a single source (even though it originated with Etalab)
- A detail: The french version of the licence references the specific article of the French PSI law, the english translation only refers generically to "French law": http://www.etalab.gouv.fr/en/licence-ouverte-open-licence

Any clarifications welcome!
Patrick


  • Re: [CC-Europe] License Ouverte, Patrick Peiffer, 03/31/2016

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page