W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > June 2009

Re: data.gov.* memo

From: Anne Washington <washingtona@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:47:52 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
To: public-egov-ig@w3.org, "Jose M. Alonso" <josema@w3.org>, "Novak, Kevin" <KevinNovak@aia.org>, "Acar, Suzanne" <Suzanne.Acar@ic.fbi.gov>, daniel@citizencontact.com, jonathan.gray@okfn.org
cc: John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk, Anne Washington <washingtona@acm.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.64.0906161325030.932@gateanne>
>Digital archival practice recognizes that the person who controls access=20
>is not necessary the creator nor the person who holds copyright. We'll=20
>have to be clear about these distinctions in any recommendations for=20
>data reuse.
>
>The issue of copyright for data.gov needs address the fact that there are=
>=20
>many types of creators for "government information". Copyright covers who=
>=20
>created the data but in some cases, the government is just warehousing it,=
>=20
>or collecting it or mandating it.  This is why it gets tricky with=20
>cultural information that is held in trust by a government entity.
>
>Harold Releyea's rubric for different origins of government information is=
>=20
>quite very useful.
>1. created by the government for its own use (i.e. an employee roster or or=
>ganization chart)
>2. created by the government for exchange with other agencies (Senate=20
>data exported to the House)
>3. collected by the government (Census data, Library of Congress=20
>Manuscripts)
>4. created through a government grant (NSF e-science datasets)
>5. required reporting or deposit by law (Federal Research Public=20
>Access Act mandatory deposit in PubMed)
>6. created by the government for public distribution (Federal Register)
>
>    Reference: McClure, Charles R., Hernon, Peter, & Relyea, Harold C.=20
>(Eds.). (1989). United States government information policies: Views and=20
>perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. p. 20 ISBN: 0893915637
>
>
>Finally, we do need to expand our lens wider than U.S. federal=20
>information. Creations of the United States Government do not hold=20
>copyright within the United States but they do in some cases outside the=20
>U.S. In addition, most U.S. states and localities in fact DO copyright=20
>their government information.
>
>
>Anne L. Washington
>
>
>On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Jose M. Alonso wrote:
>
>> Taking into account this is an international group and that we need to=20
>> accommodate the various data.gov.* (emphasis on the asterisk) (prospectiv=
>e)=20
>> realities out there, I agree with the original point made by Jonathan:
>>
>>> I wonder if it would be appropriate to also stipulate that the
>>> copyright status and terms and conditions of re-use should be made
>>> explicit - so that it is clear what can (and/or can't) be done with
>>> the material?
>>
>>
>> Yes, and we might say that we as group believe it should be as open as=20
>> possible to foster reuse, but... promoting the idea that it should be fre=
>e is=20
>> something that previously led us to long discussion when deciding what OG=
>D=20
>> definition to adopt...
>>
>> If I got right what Suzanne mentioned, this general statement would be al=
>so=20
>> applicable to data.gov (where there's already a policy stating it)
>>
>> -- Jose
>>
>>
>> ps: Spanish constitution was published on the Web with an "all rights=20
>> reserved" copyright clause, so we still have some homework to do around=
>=20
>> here... :(
>>
>>
>> El 16/06/2009, a las 17:16, Novak, Kevin escribi=F3:
>>> Suzanne,
>>>=20
>>> Great points.
>>>=20
>>> Perhaps the watermarking item from last week=92s DAS discussion is somet=
>hing=20
>>> that we could aid with.
>>>=20
>>> Agree that the agencies are doing the review and risk assessments before=
>=20
>>> releasing. We should note the effort but go forward with the understandi=
>ng=20
>>> that where data.gov in the US context is concerned that a review has=20
>>> occurred.
>>>=20
>>> Kevin
>>>=20
>>> Kevin Novak
>>> Vice President, Integrated Web Strategy and Technology
>>> The American Institute of Architects
>>> 1735 New York Avenue, NW
>>> Washington, DC 20006
>>>=20
>>> Voice:   202-626-7303
>>> Cell:       202-731-0037
>>> Twitter: @novakkevin
>>> Fax:        202-639-7606
>>> Email:    kevinnovak@aia.org
>>> Website: www.aia.org
>>>=20
>>> <image001.jpg>
>>> AIA NAMED BEST ASSOCIATIONS WEBSITE FOR THE 12th ANNUAL WEBBY AWARDS!
>>> America's Favorite Architecture Tops the Shortlist for International Hon=
>or=20
>>> for the Web
>>>=20
>>> The American Institute of Architects is the voice of the architectural=
>=20
>>> profession and the resource for its members in service to society.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> From: Acar, Suzanne [mailto:Suzanne.Acar@ic.fbi.gov]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 10:08 AM
>>> To: Novak, Kevin; 'daniel@citizencontact.com'; 'jonathan.gray@okfn.org'
>>> Cc: 'josema@w3.org'; 'public-egov-ig@w3.org';=20
>>> 'John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk'
>>> Subject: Re: data.gov.* memo
>>>=20
>>> I agree the issue is complex in general particulalrly for what you=20
>>> describe. But isn't part of managing complexity about scoping the challe=
>nge=20
>>> and organizing into smaller manageable pieces as an attempt to simplify =
>as=20
>>> a strategy? So, in the case of US Data.gov we're looking at raw data mad=
>e=20
>>> available for repurposing by any one interterested 'out there'. This dat=
>a=20
>>> in theory has already gone thru internal screening by all parties inside=
>=20
>>> the owning government agency required to include their lawyers. There is=
>=20
>>> another component to data.gov which makes things more intertesting and t=
>hat=20
>>> is the feature of the government developed and government owned data too=
>ls=20
>>> made available on data.gov. What are the implications for placing them i=
>n=20
>>> the public domain and what are the probable outcomes/risks that may requ=
>ire=20
>>> mitigating? My apologies if my wording is ambiguous - I'm obviously not=
>=20
>>> good at this type of dialogue... But how else do I learn if I don't try.=
>=2E=20
>>> Thanks in advance for bearing with me.
>>>=20
>>> Cheers,
>>> Suzanne
>>>=20
>>> From: Novak, Kevin <KevinNovak@aia.org>
>>> To: Acar, Suzanne; daniel@citizencontact.com <daniel@citizencontact.com>=
>;=20
>>> jonathan.gray@okfn.org <jonathan.gray@okfn.org>
>>> Cc: josema@w3.org <josema@w3.org>; public-egov-ig@w3.org=20
>>> <public-egov-ig@w3.org>;=20
>>> John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk<John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov=
>=2Euk>
>>> Sent: Tue Jun 16 08:57:13 2009
>>> Subject: RE: data.gov.* memo
>>> All,
>>>=20
>>> It is a complex issue even for US government. Not so much for the genera=
>l=20
>>> agencies given Suzanne=92s comments.
>>>=20
>>> The Library of Congress, Smithsonian, NEH, National Gallery of Art,=20
>>> National Park Service and a few others have =93collections=94 of materia=
>l that=20
>>> have been digitized and made available on the web. Many resulting from=
>=20
>>> agreements with trustees and custodians that have donated the materials =
>to=20
>>> the institutions for some level of access. The challenge was and is=20
>>> ensuring that the materials are rights protected and it is made clear th=
>at=20
>>> they do not fall under the normal regulations. Negotiating these agreeme=
>nts=20
>>> is quite an experience and always challenging when you don=92t have a go=
>od=20
>>> policy basis to start with. Although this isn=92t specifically a =93data=
>=94 issue=20
>>> under the current data.gov and UK efforts, it is indeed a growing issue =
>for=20
>>> agencies dealing with culturally significant materials that aren=92t=20
>>> necessarily government produced and the desire to have the materials=20
>>> located on government websites.
>>>=20
>>> Kevin
>>>=20
>>> Kevin Novak
>>> Vice President, Integrated Web Strategy and Technology
>>> The American Institute of Architects
>>> 1735 New York Avenue, NW
>>> Washington, DC 20006
>>>=20
>>> Voice:   202-626-7303
>>> Cell:       202-731-0037
>>> Twitter: @novakkevin
>>> Fax:        202-639-7606
>>> Email:    kevinnovak@aia.org
>>> Website: www.aia.org
>>>=20
>>> <image001.jpg>
>>> AIA NAMED BEST ASSOCIATIONS WEBSITE FOR THE 12th ANNUAL WEBBY AWARDS!
>>> America's Favorite Architecture Tops the Shortlist for International Hon=
>or=20
>>> for the Web
>>>=20
>>> The American Institute of Architects is the voice of the architectural=
>=20
>>> profession and the resource for its members in service to society.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> From: Acar, Suzanne [mailto:Suzanne.Acar@ic.fbi.gov]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 8:44 AM
>>> To: 'daniel@citizencontact.com'; 'jonathan.gray@okfn.org'
>>> Cc: 'josema@w3.org'; 'public-egov-ig@w3.org';=20
>>> 'John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk'; Novak, Kevin
>>> Subject: Re: data.gov.* memo
>>>=20
>>> Very interesting, Daniel. Will take a closer look.
>>> Also, thank you Jonathan for the clarifiacation on your statement.
>>>=20
>>> Cheer
>>> Suzanne
>>>=20
>>> From: Daniel Bennett <daniel@citizencontact.com>
>>> To: Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray@okfn.org>
>>> Cc: Acar, Suzanne; josema@w3.org <josema@w3.org>; public-egov-ig@w3.org=
>=20
>>> <public-egov-ig@w3.org>;John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk=20
>>> <John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk>; kevinnovak@aia.org=20
>>> <kevinnovak@aia.org>
>>> Sent: Tue Jun 16 08:44:28 2009
>>> Subject: Re: data.gov.* memo
>>> Awhile ago, when some of the bills were starting to be introduced in XML=
>,=20
>>> the Congress decided to add in some Dublin Core metadata so that issues=
>=20
>>> such as rights would be made clear. See below.
>>>=20
>>> And then there is the presumption that anyone or organization that=20
>>> publishes raw data in an open and without real applications is intending=
>=20
>>> for the data to be either used in place or copied. This is like having a=
>n=20
>>> RSS newsfeed and then claiming that the RSS newsfeed itself is copyright=
>ed.
>>>=20
>>> And then there is the issue of how data is used on the Internet with sea=
>rch=20
>>> engines essentially having a complete copy of almost everything internal=
>ly=20
>>> in order to allow for search.   Hmmmmmm.
>>>=20
>>> <metadata xmlns:dc=3D"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
>>> <dublinCore>
>>> <dc:title>111 HR 11 IH: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of
>>> </dc:title>
>>> <dc:publisher>U.S. House of Representatives</dc:publisher>
>>> <dc:date>2009-01-06</dc:date>
>>> <dc:format>text/xml</dc:format>
>>> <dc:language>EN</dc:language>
>>> <dc:rights>Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, t=
>his=20
>>> file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public=20
>>> domain.</dc:rights>
>>> </dublinCore>
>>> </metadata>
>>> Daniel
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Jonathan Gray wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Acar, Suzanne<Suzanne.Acar@ic.fbi.gov>=
>=20
>>> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> US data.gov published a policy statement on the site.  Copyright stateme=
>nt=20
>>> was not needed because government data once released for sharing is publ=
>ic=20
>>> domain.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> While this is true for US Federal government material - this is
>>> unfortunately not so clear outside the US.
>>>=20
>>> In my experience of looking at the situation with data across Europe,
>>> many government sites do not explicitly state what can and can't be
>>> re-used. The EU PSI Directive broadly encourages member states to make
>>> material available for re-use - but this is still being implemented,
>>> and some feel there is ambiguity about its scope and strength. Also
>>> its always helpful to know where rights are held by third parties!
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>
>>
--139327504-19537-1245174472=:932--
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2009 19:29:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:41 UTC