[georss] Creative Commons

Wed Jun 7 12:33:09 EDT 2006

Not a problem. Am fixing a few parts of the document and getting attribution 
and copyright issues sorted out.

Most likely will distribute to the list later today or tomorrow.

Cheers

Carl

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Howard Butler" <hobu at iastate.edu>
To: "Allan Doyle" <adoyle at eogeo.org>; "Carl Reed OGC Account" 
<creed at opengeospatial.org>
Cc: <georss at lists.eogeo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: [georss] Creative Commons

> Carl,
>
> Can you please post a copy of the OGC GeoRSS paper on a website somewhere 
> or on the maillist?  I am not a member of OGC, and I'm sure other non-OGC 
> members of the GeoRSS list would like to see it also.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Howard
>
> At 07:12 AM 6/7/2006, Allan Doyle wrote:
>
>>On Jun 6, 2006, at 18:54, Carl Reed OGC Account wrote:
>>
>> > Allan -
>> >
>> > Yes, this needs to be "hashed" out because as we move components of
>> > GeoRSS into W3C and the OGC, we need to deal with those
>> > organizations respective copyright and IPR policies. I also need to
>> > work copyright between W3C and the OGC for shared documents. I also
>> > have a very similar issue with a group in Germany that developed
>> > CityGML. They put their copyright on the document even though it is
>> > a GML Application Schema. In that case, we are looking at shared
>> > copyright with due attribution to both parties.
>>
>>We started the site with the Creative Commons license, That was by
>>mutual agreement among Raj, Josh, and myself when we first set it up
>>last year. Since then, people have been contributing to the site,
>>presumably under the impression that their work was being covered
>>under that license.
>>
>>I did not pose the question to open a discussion about changing the
>>license, but rather to figure out who the licensor should be. I think
>>the licensor is in fact the group of people who contributed to the
>>spec, even if there is no specific organization we can name. Those
>>people whose names appear in the email archives at http://
>>lists.eogeo.org/pipermail/georss/ would be considered to be the
>>collective license holders in my opinion. If you want to change the
>>license, I would expect that you would need to get permission from
>>each of them.
>>
>>I personally felt it was important to put a CC license on the parts
>>of the work I contributed. I feel that this is the only way to ensure
>>that the work be kept open in the face of today's seemingly
>>ineluctable drive to eliminate all possibility of letting the "little
>>people" have control of any intellectual property.
>>
>>If you posted a GeoRSS white paper for the OGC membership, then I
>>don't see any reason that the white paper should not itself be
>>covered under the Creative Commons license. If I were still an OGC
>>member, I would certainly be advocating that any OGC staff time spent
>>writing documents should result in Creative Commons licensed material.
>>
>>I note that deegree, an OGC reference implementation,  which was
>>presumably voted on by OGC members to receive the designation as a
>>reference implementation is covered by the LGPL, a viral license.
>>Thus, you expect others to abide by that license and would expect
>>them to make any modifications of that code public under the same terms.
>>
>>I also note that there are some OGC specifications that are available
>>only by paying a fee to ISO or ANSI (<http://>http://
>>feature.opengeospatial.org/forumbb/viewtopic.php?t=305).
>>
>>I believe it's in the best interests of keeping GeoRSS open and
>>available to everyone to for us to keep it under a Creative Commons
>>license.
>>
>> >
>> > Yesterday, I posted a candidate GeoRSS White Paper for
>> > consideration by the OGC membership. I state several times that
>> > some of the material is either extracted from or a synopsis of the
>> > content on the GeoRSS web site.
>>
>>I think it would be courteous to the rest of the georss contributors
>>who don't have access to that document to post it here.
>>
>>  From the paper, here are those several mentions:
>>
>>"GeoRSS, created outside the OGC but supported and sponsored by the
>>OGC and likely to become an OGC standard,"
>>
>>"The majority of the content in this document can also be found 
>>with many
>>examples  on the GeoRSS web site  www.georss.org."
>>
>>"The GeoRSS developers, a small group of OGC staff and members and
>>other highly
>>creative "geohackers,"
>>
>> > So, for this white paper, what do we do about copyright? The
>> > current OGC copyright is now consistent (yes, finally!) and not
>> > nearly as restrictive as it used to be. So, I would suggest, as
>> > with CityGML, shared copyright.
>>
>>For this white paper, please do the following things:
>>
>>1. Remove the OGC copyright statement from the top which says:
>>"Copyright © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc. All Rights
>>Reserved. To obtain additional rights of use, visit http://
>>www.opengeospatial.org/legal/.
>>
>>2. Remove my name and the EOGEO name which you used without
>>permission as an author and as a submitting organization (EOGEO is
>>not an OGC member so we certainly can't be a submitting organization,
>>unless your rules have changed).
>>
>>3. Add in the following wording:
>>
>>"Material in this white paper is taken from the source material at
>>http://www.georss.org under the terms of the Creative Commons
>>Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 license."
>>
>>*and*
>>
>>"The contents of this document are covered under the Creative Commons
>>Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 license which can be found at http://
>>creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/"
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>         Allan
>>
>> >
>> > Thoughts welcome.
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> > Carl
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Doyle" <adoyle at eogeo.org>
>> > To: <georss at lists.eogeo.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 2:58 PM
>> > Subject: [georss] Creative Commons
>> >
>> >
>> >> The question came up today, our site is covered by a Creative Commons
>> >> Attribution Share Alike 2.5 license, but we don't say what
>> >> attribution to give, nor do we provide a contact address.
>> >>
>> >> I suggest that we say
>> >>
>> >> ===============
>> >> All uses of this material must be accompanied by the following
>> >> statement:
>> >> "CC - Material from GeoRSS.org web site, used under Creative Commons
>> >> Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License."
>> >>
>> >> That also means that any document which uses this material must also
>> >> be available under the same terms. Please read the license!
>> >> ================
>> >>
>> >> Or something like that. I think we really need a "licensor", and I'm
>> >> not sure whether the licensor must be a legal entity (i.e. a person
>> >> or a corporation) or whether it can be a group (the "GeoRSS
>> >> Development Team").
>> >>
>> >> It might be good to hash this out quickly...
>> >>
>> >> Allan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Allan Doyle
>> >> +1.781.433.2695
>> >> adoyle at eogeo.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> georss mailing list
>> >> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>> >> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>> >
>>
>>--
>>Allan Doyle
>>+1.781.433.2695
>>adoyle at eogeo.org
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>georss mailing list
>>georss at lists.eogeo.org
>>http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>
> 