[Geodata] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] defining a Geospatial Integration Showcase to be launched at FOSS4G 2009

[jo at frot.org]

dear Cameron, all,

  Quoting Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>:
  > Does OSGeo have an official stance on data licencing? If not, I think
  > we should.

No, it doesn't. Last year I started work on an "Open Geodata Licensing Guide";
not a recommendation but an overview of the options with their  
benefits and drawbacks, written with an audience of public  
administrations in mind.
It hasn't been updated in the light of recent discussions.
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Guide_to_Public_Geodata_Licensing

  An official stance could be Quite Powerful. I want to avoid stirring  
up fruitless controversy though!

  > Currently, the Australian government is moving licencing the majority
  > of their data (including geospatial) under Creative Commons.

  I heard this about Andalucia's regional government geodata the other day.
  My first response is "which flavour of Creative Commons?" - as  
non-commercial is not really open and may restrict potential benefits  
to the data provider.
  This is before even getting into "is copyright appropriate for data?".

  > The responses I've heard from Australian government about Zero Commons
  > is that the license is still in draft, and that a government will need

I see on the CC wiki that CC0 is due to come out of draft Any Day Now.
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_Feedback
Jonathan Gray from OKFN attended the workshop mentioned there and may  
know more.

Open Data Commons also has a PDDL - Public Domain Dedication and License -
which was launched last March and is currently the only open license  
that meets the "Science Commons protocol" for open data which CC0 is  
intended to be an implementation of. PDDL is like CC0 in that it is an  
"internationalised" method of placing work in the public domain plus a  
provision for "Community Norms" - which can be used for attribution /  
citation / linking etc.

  >>> Same as OpenStreetMap

I'm looking forward to the conclusion of the OSM relicensing effort  
which has been generating a lot of heat recently. However their  
eventual solution will be geared to aggregate collections with many  
contributors and not (initially)
appropriate for public authority data sets.

Apologies for my recent quietness, I still owe a long response to  
David's thought-provoking email from a month ago -  
http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geodata/2008-September/000769.html


  jo
  --



Powered by Horde