Re: LOD Data Sets, Licensing, and AWS

Hi,

2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>:
> When you publish said data as Linked Data you will be using an HTTP URI, and
> in doing so there is implicit attribution.
> If you retain the URIs of the source, or make explicit claims (e.g.,
> dc:source) that expose the original data sources then everything is fine,
> nobody along the value chain gets dislocated.

Yes, with respect to linking back to the originating *dataset* I
basically agree with you. I'd read your original comments as
suggesting that simply reusing the core data was sufficient, and I
think we're agreeing that the source (i.e. the void dataset) needs to
be acknowledged.

However this simply provides a means for citing sources, there are
other aspects to attribution that also need to be addressed, e.g. how
its actually surfaced to a user. E.g. what properties are included in
the Void description of a dataset that might be included in a user
interface. There's also the protocol level issues, e.g. how do we
include links from SPARQL results?

> Ted Nelson: referred to the above in different terms as: Transcopyright.

AIUI Transcopyright is a default licensing scheme for content (and
presumably data) that encourages a share-alike behaviour rather than
the current default "all rights reserved" copyright situation we have
now. So related but not exactly the same.

> He also used the term: Transclusion, to describe what we commonly refer to
> as: mashups (Web 2.0 code hacks) and meshups (Linked Data emixes), today.

He'd probably argue differently, I've seen him speak and he's an
interesting character! :). But yes, the essence is the same.

L.

-- 
Leigh Dodds
Programme Manager, Talis Platform
Talis
leigh.dodds@talis.com
http://www.talis.com

Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 13:49:30 UTC