Re: There's No Money in Linked Data

Soren


I agree that there is the need for defining open , however


> Pascal, I somewhat disagree with that statement: there is (and should
> be) a clear (boolean) definition what open means:
> http://opendefinition.org/



 the opendefinition is (or at least was last time I looked at it)

a) not open, and as such systemically flawed
b) not compliant with legal requirements for IP protections (in the berne
convention sense)


I would not use, nor encourage anyone to use it as a valid reference,

There remains work to be done  :-)

PDM

> .
>

>
> PS: A few days I attended a talk by a German lawyer about data licensing
> and he said that if you publish your data on the Web without access
> control, it is (at least in Germany) not secured by any IPR and everyone
> can (without asking the publisher) use the data, republish it and do
> whatever with it as he pleases.


a lot of lawyers are inexperienced and would lose the case in court,


If this is really true, at least for all
> Germans all data published as Linked Data on the Web without any license
> would be Open Data too ;-)
>

this would leave a lot of room for lenghthy legal battles, best avoided!!!
 in fact
avoid at all costs!!

>
> > On 5/23/2013 10:09 AM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> >> (not sure why this, which I wrote ages ago, is sitting again
> >> in a window on my computer. Apologies if it was already sent before!).
> >>
> >>
> >> Short version: Please change LD to LOD throughout.
> >>
> >> A little while ago,  when we had made the 5* linked data  mug,
> >>
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/diagrams/lod/480759174v0_350x350_Back.jpg
> >> I got a valid objection to it from the people doing
> >> for example enterprise linked data that their client's
> >> data was generally extremely confidential and no way
> >> would it be open, and the 5 star principle were really
> >> valuable for interoperability, but the clients were scared
> >> off by the fact that they could not even get one star without being
> open.
> >>
> >> So that led to a big change, and more careful wording
> >> and a (then) new mug.
> >>
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/diagrams/lod/597992118v2_350x350_Back.jpg
> >>
> >>   The new mug has in black, the Linked Data story, and in green,
> >> stamped on
> >> "OPEN"  to make the "Linked Data" become "Linked Open Data",
> >> and also in green "Open Licence" added to the requirements for the
> >> first star.
> >> So the mug works two ways.
> >> Without the green, it is about Linked Data (LD).
> >>   If you include the green (e.g. wearing rose-coloured spectacles)
> >> it becomes a recipe for Linked Open Data (LOD).
> >>
> >> To have even 1 star, Linked Open Data must have an open licence.
> >> other wise it is not Linked Open Data at all.
> >>
> >> Meanwhile, 5* linked data (like my financial data
> >> for my taxes) can be completely private.
> >>
> >> The ability to discuss the different star levels of
> >> Linked Data is important too.
> >>
> >> This distinction has been really important
> >> to a lot of people's understanding and to the
> >> businesses in the space.
> >>
> >> So when your article is ONLY about the openness,
> >> about the need for linked Open data to be open,
> >> it is a big problem that you use the wrong term!
> >>
> >> There is lots of money in Enterprise Application Integration
> >> which is not what you are doing.
> >>
> >> I would ask you to update the paper.
> >> I strongly suggest you update the PDFs you have in place with
> >> a back-link to the original.
> >>
> >> Please edit the paper and basically put "Linked Open Data" and  LOD
> >> wherever you are
> >> talking about it, not "Linked Data" and LD.
> >>
> >> Because the points that you make are generally important
> >> and interesting and I'd like to be able to point to the paper.
> >>
> >> I have other comments about the actual content, but
> >> this is more important.
> >>
> >> The title... must be something more appropriate
> >> "Commercial use of Linked Open Data stymied by Licence Issues"
> >> "LOD re-use plagued by lack of suitable licence"
> >> "Viral or missing licenses hamper LOD uptake"
> >> ... or something....
> >>
> >> Thanking you in advance.
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2013-05 -17, at 22:13, Pascal Hitzler wrote:
> >>
> >>> We just finished a piece indicating serious legal issues regarding
> >>> the commercialization of Linked Data - this may be of general
> >>> interest, hence the post. We hope to stimulate discussions on this
> >>> issue (hence the provokative title).
> >>>
> >>> Available from
> >>> http://knoesis.wright.edu/faculty/pascal/pub/nomoneylod.pdf
> >>>
> >>> Abstract.
> >>> Linked Data (LD) has been an active research area for more than 6
> >>> years and many aspects about publishing, retrieving, linking, and
> >>> cleaning Linked Data have been investigated. There seems to be a
> >>> broad and general agreement that in principle LD datasets can be very
> >>> useful for solving a wide variety of problems ranging from practical
> >>> industrial analytics to highly specific research problems. Having
> >>> these notions in mind, we started exploring the use of notable LD
> >>> datasets such as DBpedia, Freebase, Geonames and others for a
> >>> commercial application. However, it turns out that using these
> >>> datasets in realistic settings is not always easy. Surprisingly, in
> >>> many cases the underlying issues are not technical but legal barriers
> >>> erected by the LD data publishers. In this paper we argue that these
> >>> barriers are often not justified, detrimental to both data publishers
> >>> and users, and are often built without much consideration of their
> >>> consequences.
> >>>
> >>> Authors:
> >>> Prateek Jain, Pascal Hitzler, Krzysztof Janowicz, Chitra Venkatramani
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Prof. Dr. Pascal Hitzler
> >>> Kno.e.sis Center, Wright State University, Dayton, OH
> >>> pascal@pascal-hitzler.de   http://www.knoesis.org/pascal/
> >>> Semantic Web Textbook: http://www.semantic-web-book.org
> >>> Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>