Re: Advocacy URL for publishing data with an explicit license

Perhaps I'm introducing more complexity into the question than necessary.  A bit of willful ignorance goes a long way here.  With my app for ISWC[1] I ran into the problem of dct:creator vs dct:contributor with Public Sector Information - all from the UN.

In the case of UN LOCODES I was reformatting and making an extract of an ACCESS data base (linked to dbpedia).  The information was not available in any sort of web format, so I was rightly a dct:contributor, and the information was Public Domain [2].

In the case of UNESCO World Heritage Sites, I did not create, and contribution was nill.  UNESCO was quite clear in their wishes concerning links [3] although they offer an XML version then ask you not to change anything (nod, wink).

For the app I settled for a CC Public Domain Mark with a no Personally Identifiable Information caveat (hoping Charlemagne does not mind).

--Gannon

[1]http://www.rustprivacy.org/2011/phase/iswc2011/index.html
[2] http://live.unece.org/cefact/locode/welcome.html

[3] http://whc.unesco.org/en/disclaimer/





________________________________
From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
To: public-lod@w3.org
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 1:28 PM
Subject: Advocacy URL for publishing data with an explicit license

Dear list,

We all know that data publishers *should* publish their data along with an explicit license that explains what kind of re-use is allowed.

Can anyone suggest a good reference/link/URL that makes this case? A blog post or advocacy site or similar?

Bonus points if it has specific recommendations for RDF.

My preferred candidate so far is this – but it's not particularly strong on the “why”:
http://www.w3.org/TR/void/#license

Thanks,
Richard