Global Summit 2011/CC and the broader open government and PSI community
Creative Commons and the broader open government and PSI session notes
- CC Global Summit
- 17 September 2011
- what is cc's role in the open gov community in general?
- should cc create other tools that may be useful or need to be created for the open gov community?
- should cc create guidelines or toolkits for open gov? NZ released declaration on open and transparent principles and has open gov roadmap; there’s also the UK framework
- how to continue to contribute to standards bodies like W3C?
- how should cc hq coordinate/support/mobilise affiliates on these issues? someone noted that hq should work connecting and networking; hq can help and figure out who to introduce affiliates to
- come up with matrix on how to evaluate open gov/PSI achievements across countries, e.g. scorecard or evaluation matrix; OECD has one, but needs to be improved; this would motivate countries to do more
- build case study repository of open gov successes to assist governments can make informed choices wrt legal aspects of PSI; other educational materials too
- not a question about which license to choose, but technical questions; OKF already has a doc on this (open data manual?) so look at that or build upon
- psi is inherently interdisciplinary so we need to share not only legal scenarios but also the best arguments, and metrics too
- cc's role depends on the country, and affiliates need to be the ones to lead the conversation; cc hq should play a supporting role
- are there higher level principles that hq office can take on and communicate? this is an ongoing question of how normative CC should be wrt this; a set of international principles could be valuable
- Poland is taking psi further, aka open licensing for information generated and financed by public agencies; leads to questions about what should public procurement laws be?
- database rights are a key issue, but not the only issue
- ongoing interoperability concerns and confusion about what happens with some PSI released under cc by and other under odc by, are they compatible/interoperable?
- not for relicensing, but we observe that other tools are compatible, e.g. CC0 and PDDL
- how does cc license interact with other open government licenses; repeated discussion that if CC license would have covered database rights UK would have adopted it, not created OGL; when you talk about pan-European data portals, you don't want a lot of different licenses; just creates confusion and complexity, we want simplicity
- should there be a protocol for you to write you're own license, or how to write a compatibility clause?
- open gov partnership; want/need for CC participation; there is room and encouragement for this via the civil society advisory component (there is a steering committee of half gov and half civil society)
- 4 components to OGP: transparency, citizen engagement, accountability, technology and innovation (cc role could fit best via the technology and innovation angle)
- early version of U.S. OGP action plan didn't say anything about copyright/licensing/databases; what about other jurisdictions?
- how can cc work together as a community to remix open gov roadmaps and plans via process within NZ, UK, AU, especially in relation to offering assistance related to OGP?
- CCNZ has an online decision process to assist gov agencies on whether to release information on the nzgoal basis; fill in fields and spits out recommended license and report; nzgoal.info
- guide about enforceability; cc hq could be one central repository of really useful information because the enforceability is key to selling it to governments
- recommendation that CC make a statement about how we think governments should operate, then make those recommendations to government; should include psi, public procurement, under these terms, should be 1 license or diff licenses in diff circumstances, etc.; figure out what we want and ask for it; first high level principles, then local decisions about cc0 and cc by, etc.
- several jurisdictions are interested, for example japan, uk, greece, italy, aus, nz
- data tracking for gov information and psi; govs have media, websites, etc but no good metrics about what happens with dataset use; would obviously be useful for cc as well as for governments to measure success; could also help demonstrate which licenses are more effective wrt reuse; qualitative data is valuable too; e.g. “data that saves lives” is high value
- public data corporation consultation ongoing now; how would commercialisation model fit within the larger open data frameworks?
- trying to make more data free by paying for other data?