[odc-discuss] Open Database Licence

Rufus Pollock rufus.pollock at okfn.org
Wed Mar 4 18:35:33 GMT 2009


2009/3/4 Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind at jhu.edu>:
> This is interesting and odd to me, because my understanding was that
> providing a share-alike license was pretty much unworkable for data -- not
> feasible to make a legally enforceable contract to these ends accross
> jurisdictions. Which is what led to the PDDL/CC0/Science Data Commons
> approach.

I don't think anyone ever thought this was 'unworkable' for data: the
original license Jordan wrote (out of which came the PDDL) was an SA
type license.

There is a debate as to whether SA is a good idea (John Wilbanks of SC
is particularly critical) and in some jurisdictions is debatable
exactly whether (and what) 'DB rights' exist on which to base a SA
license. I wrote a blog post on this recently that goes over much of
this:

<http://blog.okfn.org/2009/02/02/open-data-openness-and-licensing/>

This has a bunch of links to more info at the bottom. If you are
interested in the question of 'data rights' I'd point to our guide on
this matter:

http://www.okfn.org/wiki/OpenDataLicensing

There's also an appendix specifically commenting on Science Common's
"Protocol on Implementing Open Access to Data":

<http://blog.okfn.org/2009/02/09/comments-on-the-science-commons-protocol-for-implementing-open-access-data/>

> But apparently it is legally feasible in some cases?  Any background
> material I should read explaining how ODbL manages to work at all?

See previous.

> I'm also not certain what the effective difference between the Factual
> Information License and the PDDL is. "MIT style" generally means that that
> the user is free to do pretty much whatever they want with it. So the user
> might have the same rights with the PDDL or the FIL, but the FIL doesn't
> actually put anything into the public domain?  I'll have to read the FIL
> carefully; again, my understanding was that it was legally very
> complicated/infeasible to do this with factual information _without_ just
> putting it in the public domain.

I agree here. I think the FIL and the ODbL were the original licenses
drafted by Jordan and formed a complementary package. With the
development of the PDDL I think the FIL is perhaps no longer needed
and can be deprecated in favour of the PDDL. However, Jordan would
need to comment on this.

Rufus



More information about the odc-discuss mailing list