[georss] Creative Commons

Wed Jun 7 12:18:36 EDT 2006

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