dear Steve, all,
On 09/02/2010 02:09, SteveC wrote:
Have you looked at the data license menu from CKAN.net - the
dropdown list at http://www.ckan.net/package/new
The list there does include non-commercial use options, both Creative
Commons and Other flavours.
I think this is the thing that Rufus waved around as the reason
there wouldn't be a NC version of the ODbL. Which I have to super
disagree with. You can push the rhetoric and religion so far on
'openness' but simply denying that NC should exist is like the CC0
people denying that the ODbL 'should' exist.
Personally, I agree with you that some NC use, particularly for the
public sector can be seen as part of a progression and used to bargain
with. "Give us time... the supporting culture needs to adapt...".
It can be unclear whether a use is non-commercial - there is a growing
grey area - and it can be expensive to test it. If I support my local
history site with Google AdWords, is that commercial use?
The cost of commercial licensing of data may outweigh the benefit, even
economically. Links to and re-use of data may have serious future value
for preservation, outweighing short-term gains.
There will be redistribution of data that quickly loses attachment to
the non-commercial license terms, once it is used in a combined work.
Frankly, I think if the ODC / OKFN / CKAN or whatever acronym storm
it is that publishes the ODbL is unable to recognise that then it's
inevitable that someone else will. We're at the point in time where
there's a lot of data coming out, and just doing a dance and
incanting the Public Domain mantra won't fly. The ODbL gets us quite
a way there, but it needs to look like this:
http://creativecommons.org/choose/
OKFN is a name for the Open Knowledge Foundation Network. That is a
collection of projects dealing with open data, grouped together with
shared infrastructure and overlap between groups - modelled on the ASF,
like OSGeo is. http://okfn.org/projects/
Open Data Commons with its license set is one of those projects:
http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/
CKAN is another project, some free software and an installation of it on
the web ( also within http://data.gov.uk/ ): http://ckan.net/
Meanwhile, I hadn't realised the background religious war had reached
another of those flamy angst peaks. Sorry!
So given all the religion floating around, the basic question to me
is: Is the ODbL forkable? Because if it is, then we can build an
organisation which can build the above. Unless, of course, ODC /
OKFN / CKAN changes it's position on whether we're allowed to use
condoms or not. And if it does, I'll wholeheartedly support it. But
right now, with all due respect to everything Rufus has done, I'm
very wary of the intersection of what a data publisher wants to do
and what Rufus thinks you should be able to do.
Well, I don't see the harm, in the abstract, of providing a draft
Non-Commercial Use ODbL-modelled license if there is a constituency out
there really requiring it. (Though will this help fix the problem of
conflating differently-licensed overlapping data sets?)
Whether that is a full-fledged "Open Data Commons" license is ultimately
up to Jordan Hatcher, I guess. If you have someone who can put time into
putting a draft, that would really help sort it out.
Good luck, and thanks for the great work you are doing with OSM,
jo
--
_______________________________________________
geo-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/geo-discuss
