[georss] Creative Commons
Carl Reed OGC Account
creed at opengeospatial.org
Thu Jun 8 11:08:15 EDT 2006
Josh -
Perhaps initially you, Allan, Raj, and myself should get on a conference
call and perhaps frame a suggested approach and then turn the result over to
the list for continued discussion. Of course anyone can join in. Just that
perhaps we need a "baseline" to start fruitful discussion. I think the Allan
and Josh thoughts provide an excellent basis for defining the initial
discussion position.
In terms of the White Paper, I have removed the OGC copyright for now and
have included the CC statement. This gives us time to work a consistent,
known approach. However, I will need agreement and resolution of the
approach before public posting of the White Paper - which will happen after
OGC member approval in Edinburgh.
Cheers
Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh at oklieb" <josh at oklieb.net>
To: <georss at lists.eogeo.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: [georss] Creative Commons
> Perfectly happy to discuss this online, it's just that email threads
> are not always the best tool for working through differing
> understandings of terms or aims; sometimes they make them worse.
> Let's try the email thread. We could fire up a #georss irc channel
> (or use #eogeo or #geo )as well if that would work for Mikel and
> others. If those do not seem to be converging effectively, we may
> still need some conversations, but they can be reported and do not
> need to involve everyone at once.
>
> My understanding is that both OGC and W3C are able to deal with (e.g.
> publish, adopt) documents whose copyrights belong to the authors, not
> necessarily to the organization, but how and when are not resolved.
> The two questions I see brought up here are:
>
> 1) Who is it that holds the copyright and issues the CC license to
> the material on the georss.org site? Is an informal group sufficient
> or would it be better for a legal entity to hold the copyright for
> clarity and stability.
>
> 2) Should the OGC whitepaper which Carl put together be a multiply
> authored (and copyrighted) paper by some of those georss contributors
> which acknowledges the CC license of material from the site, or
> should it be a "report on the georss material" by Carl (OGC staff)
> which is OGC copyrighted, but carries the same CC license (or
> equivalent) and attribution of the CC license on the site material?
>
> I hope we can agree on multiple aims:
>
> That a place where a variety of independent workers can help georss
> to evolve is valuable (punctuated equilibrium for you evolution fans),
>
> That endorsement by the respective organizations of versions or
> snapshots of georss as extensions or refinements of either OGC (GML)
> or W3C (Geo) or IETF (Atom) standards is also valuable both for the
> use of technology and for those organizations.
>
> We just need to reconcile any inconsistencies between these two aims
> and get on with some real work (uh, I dunno, creating slide
> presentations or maybe even coding).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Josh
>
> On Jun 8, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Allan Doyle wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 7, 2006, at 18:12, Mikel Maron wrote:
>>
>>> I wouldn't be able to call in (just getting settled in the
>>> dominican republic), as likely many other people here.
>>> And in general, isn't it good to have a text record of such
>>> discussions?
>>> So my request is for this discussion to take place on the mailing
>>> list.
>>
>> Sounds like a good request to me.
>>
>> Allan
>>
>>>
>>> -Mikel
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: "Josh at oklieb" <josh at oklieb.net>
>>> To: Doyle Allan <adoyle at eogeo.org>; Raj Singh
>>> <rsingh at opengeospatial.org>; Carl Reed OGC Account
>>> <creed at opengeospatial.org>
>>> Cc: georss at lists.eogeo.org
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2006 2:11:48 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [georss] Creative Commons
>>>
>>> May I suggest a conversation tomorrow on this topic? Education and
>>> negotiation on copyright issues which include control, credit,
>>> access, and so on. We need to understand how those can flow back and
>>> forth between organizations / communities and how to properly express
>>> them to reflect what we think we are agreeing on.
>>>
>>> Line: +1 (405) 244-5555 (5699#) at 11am EDT
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Josh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 7, 2006, at 12:18 PM, Howard Butler wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> georss mailing list
>>>> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>>>> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> georss mailing list
> georss at lists.eogeo.org
> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>
More information about the georss
mailing list