Yes, the principle of open data for data derived from publicly funded
research is fairly widely accepted at least in developed countries. It
is embodied, for example, in the OECD Principles and Guidelines for
Access to Research Data from Public Funding, which has been accepted
by the science and technology ministers/agencies of the OECD
countries. However, not all countries accept this. Moreover, not all
government data are research data, and some agencies that hold and
release administrative data--that may be useful for research--still
place restrictions or charges on these data to fund their own
operations. Note that the U.S. government is one of the only
governments to declare government produced data to be entirely in the
public domain. Most other governments claim copyright, and then use
their power as copyright owners to give out usage and dissemination
rights with varying degrees of openness.
Although I agree in general that publicly funded researchers should
share their data, note that some researchers still may invest alot
into their data. For example, critical research in the Antarctic could
never have been undertaken without both public funding and scientists
willing to go spend six months in cold and isolation. Those scientists
might not even be willing to go if they lose the ability to publish
based on the data they obtained. NSF's announcement today that it is
suspending this summer's field season due to the US government
shutdown illustrates the varied risks of this kind of science.
I think one challenge of open data from the viewpoint of an archives
manager is that the long-term responsibility for stewardship of the
data may be too diffuse or hard to justify. If people believe that
there are plenty of copies of the open data around, actual
preservation efforts (e.g., determining which copies are original or
authentic, documenting data before the original producers disappear or
forget, amd ensuring backups with high integrity) may be hard to
justify. The risk is that some open data could end up being more
ephemeral than data with clear ownership and responsibility in the
long run. I'm not sure that anyone has a handle on how significant a
risk this is...
Cheers, Bob
*****
Dr. Robert S. Chen
Director, Center for International Earth Science Information Network
(CIESIN), The Earth Institute, Columbia University
Manager, NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC)
P.O. Box 1000, 61 Route 9W, Palisades, NY 10964 USA
tel. +1 845-365-8952; fax +1 845-365-8922
e-mail: [email protected]
CIESIN web site: http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu
SEDAC web site: http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Gene Shackman wrote:
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 15:40:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gene Shackman <[email protected]>
To: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [okfn-discuss] what are the arguments against open data
This is good. Someone may spend a lot of time developing data, so they should
be able to get credit, be in control, get the benefits from the data. I can
relate to that.
Govt data is a somewhat different case, in that govt data *should* be open
(except for national security or privacy). Even people who use govt grants to
create data should go in with the expectation that their data must be open. If
the people fund it, the people should have it.
I'd like to hear a little more about challenges to funding if the data are
open, though.
But otherwise, it seems difficult to expect people who privately develop data
to just open it up to anyone without some compensation, or recognition, or
control. That's where we need some kind of business model.
So, are there private business people on this list?
?
Gene
________________________________
From: Bob Chen <[email protected]>
To: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2013 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [okfn-discuss] what are the arguments against open data
(snipped a lot)
1) Scientists and others invest alot of time in creating data and do
not wish to lose control or lose credit for this investment. Many
scientists believe that open data allows others to come in and reap
the benefits (in terms of publications etc.) of their investment in
the data unfairly.
2) Those who "own" data are more willing to invest in expanding and
improving the data.
3) Even public agencies that generate and distribute data want some
control over their data.
4) Open data may also undercut other business models that have been
developed over time to support the necessary investment and
institutional commitment in data.
develop and demonstrate strong and sustainable alternative business
models for supporting the full life cycle of open data.
Cheers, Bob
*****
Dr. Robert S. Chen
Director, Center for International Earth Science Information Network
? (CIESIN), The Earth Institute, Columbia University
Manager, NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC)
P.O. Box 1000, 61 Route 9W, Palisades, NY 10964 USA
tel. +1 845-365-8952; fax +1 845-365-8922
e-mail: [email protected]
CIESIN web site: http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu
SEDAC web site: http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu
_______________________________________________
okfn-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
