[Aust-NZ] Geoscience Australia goes CC-BY [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Bruce Bannerman B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au
Sun Dec 6 17:01:44 PST 2009 

Hi Brent,

Sorry, I'm missing the point.

What is it that you don't like about CC?


Bruce

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pcreso at pcreso.com [mailto:pcreso at pcreso.com] 
> Sent: Monday, 7 December 2009 11:39 AM
> To: Bruce Bannerman
> Cc: Aust-NZ at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: RE: [Aust-NZ] Geoscience Australia goes CC-BY 
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
> 
> Hi Bruce,
> 
> Similar situation in NZ, NZGOAL is the NZ Govt Open Access 
> Licence, being discussed at present:
> 
> http://www.e.govt.nz/policy/information-data/nzgoalframework.html
> 
> They are also suggesting CC-BY, but as I said earlier, some 
> of us have a few reservations about this as the ideal 
> solution for data.
> 
> Attribution is fine, provided it facilitates mashups & 
> remixes, but there is nothing about provenance.
> 
> One site in NZ offers its data free for reuse with an 
> attribution requirement that simply says something like 
> "Where users believe it is reasonable, please acknowledge the source"
> 
> Unfortunately, we are in an environment where governments are 
> seen to be, (especially in their mirror) as owners of govt 
> data, rather than custodians of public data. So data is owned 
> & only released where required, instead of managed & only 
> kept private when justified.
> 
> See http://opendefinition.org/licenses for a comparison of 
> some of the more commonly used licences.
> 
> I very much believe CC licencing for Govt data is a 
> significant step forward, but as a data manager & user, I 
> believe CC-BY is really only a partial solution to this 
> issue, but because it is seen by some as a simple & total 
> solution, we are likely to be stuck with the ramifications of 
> adopting a less than ideal approach for years to come if it 
> is adopted as a universal standard for data.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>   Brent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- On Mon, 12/7/09, Bruce Bannerman <B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au> wrote:
> 
> > From: Bruce Bannerman <B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au>
> > Subject: RE: [Aust-NZ] Geoscience Australia goes CC-BY 
> > [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
> > To: "'pcreso at pcreso.com'" <pcreso at pcreso.com>
> > Date: Monday, December 7, 2009, 11:37 AM Hi Brent,
> > 
> > The various CC licenses are quite well respected for releasing data 
> > under. Many Australian government organisations are moving in this 
> > direction, e.g. BOM Water Division (and hopefully other data to 
> > follow), the Victorian Government etc.
> > 
> > I don't know if you had to chance to catch the talk at FOSS4G, but 
> > Anne Fitzgerald from QUT gave a good review of the current state of 
> > play wrt licensing.
> > 
> > I think that this talk was recorded for playback.
> > 
> > Bruce
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: aust-nz-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> > 
> > > [mailto:aust-nz-bounces at lists.osgeo.org]
> > On Behalf Of
> > > pcreso at pcreso.com
> > > Sent: Monday, 7 December 2009 7:52 AM
> > > To: OSGeo Aust-NZ; Brianna Laugher
> > > Subject: Re: [Aust-NZ] Geoscience Australia goes
> > CC-BY
> > > 
> > > Hi Brianna,
> > > 
> > > I have some concerns about the adoption of CC licences
> > for
> > > data, which are shared by others, & have been
> > discussed on
> > > the net in various places...
> > > 
> > > CC was designed as a content licence, not a data
> > licence and
> > > IMHO has two main shortcomings as a data licence (and
> > open
> > > database licences have yet further idiosyncracies).
> > > 
> > > Firstly, CC3-BY allows the data to be released with
> > whatever
> > > attribution requirements the data provider cares to
> > add. Not
> > > a problem for content generally, but the point in
> > releasing
> > > data is to allow it to be used & re-used with
> > other data &
> > > derivative data. Tracking & implementing some
> > attribution
> > > requirements in this situation can lead to situations
> > where
> > > the required attribution is impossible, difficult or 
> cumbersome for 
> > > users. If CC3 is to be used for data,
> > then a
> > > common & facilitative standard government
> > attribution
> > > requirement should be incorporated instead of the
> > usual
> > > unrestricted one, which lets everyone create their
> > own.
> > > 
> > > Secondly, any information on data provenance
> > (metadata) is
> > > not required. To be useful, all such datasets should
> > have
> > > some basic metadata available. For example, data
> > precision,
> > > date of release, date of expiry (or when it is due to
> > be
> > > superceded), etc. A road centreline dataset, or census
> > 
> > > information, or land use data is of very restricted
> > use
> > > unless this information is available to provide users
> > with
> > > enough information to know if the dataset is
> > unsuitable for
> > > the intended purpose for any reason. Without this
> > information
> > > datasets can easily be misused, misinterpreted &
> > provide
> > > misleading results. If I have two census datasets, but
> > don't
> > > know what year each was taken.... etc. 
> > > 
> > > Several licences for freely available (open) data are
> > 
> > > available & more are being developed, much like
> > the variety
> > > of licences for FOSS software (GPL. LGPL, BSD, Apache,
> > MIT, etc...)
> > > 
> > > A few examples of Open Data licences & sources of
> > information: 
> > > 
> > > http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/
> > > https://biblios.net/pddl
> > > http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/open-database-licence/
> > > http://opendefinition.org/guide/data
> > > 
> > > 
> > > One example that may be of interest, the organisation
> > I work
> > > for, NIWA in NZ (comments are my opinion, not
> > necessarily
> > > NIWA's :-), used to sell access to our national
> > climate
> > > database. About 18 months ago we made this freely
> > available. 
> > > We went from around 200 paying users to currently
> > about 10,000. 
> > > 
> > > It has implications for the organisation, and some
> > users now
> > > have expectations of availability, so any downtime
> > (even for
> > > a free service) can occasionally result in quite
> > abusive
> > > demands, but I believe the freeing up of these data
> > has been
> > > a very positive exercise overall, despite the
> > inevitable
> > > leeches of such services :-)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > 
> > >   Brent Wood
> > > 
> > > --- On Mon, 12/7/09, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com>
> > > > Subject: [Aust-NZ] Geoscience Australia goes
> > CC-BY
> > > > To: "OSGeo Aust-NZ" <Aust-NZ at lists.osgeo.org>
> > > > Date: Monday, December 7, 2009, 1:28 AM Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > Apologies if this was discussed before, but I was
> > wondering if the 
> > > > Geoscience Australia move to the CC-BY license
> > had come to the 
> > > > collective attention?
> > > > 
> > > 
> http://www.ga.gov.au/about-us/news-media/latest-news/index.jsp#commons
> > > > 
> > > > As a geospatial onlooker rather than
> > in-the-thick-of-it 
> > > member I would 
> > > > be interested to hear from the folks here what
> > they think this is 
> > > > likely to mean, or how it may play out, eg more
> > stuff available 
> > > > directly online, less sales?
> > > > 
> > > > cheers
> > > > Brianna
> > > > (Wikimedia Australia)
> > > > 
> > > > --
> > > > They've just been waiting in a mountain for the
> > right
> > > > moment:
> > > > http://modernthings.org/
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Aust-NZ mailing list
> > > > Aust-NZ at lists.osgeo.org
> > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/aust-nz
> > > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Aust-NZ mailing list
> > > Aust-NZ at lists.osgeo.org
> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/aust-nz
> > > 
>

More information about the Oceania mailing list