- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 12:26:36 +0100
- To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
I keep meaning to reply to this Rob and now that I'm back from a succession of trips, finally, I can. I'm trying to understand more fully what this boils down to. The case of free for non-profit use, fee payable for commercial or business uses is already covered and clear enough. What concerns me is that you *might* be driving at something that says "casual Web developers beware, you may be about to do something naughty'? Well, that just comes down to them understanding the environment they're working in, it's not a tech spec issue I don't think? Actually, we have a specific line in the charter that might be relevant [1]. Enforcement mechanisms and legal jurisdictional issues are out of scope, meaning that we're explicitly not concerned with providing evidence that a duty, permission etc. has been received and understood by the recipient. Have I understood you correctly? Post codes and addresses are a tricky one. If you were to crowdsource a complete list of addresses from around the UK... you'd be breaking the law since those addresses are all copyright of the Royal Mail. Many battles have been fought and lost over this issue. Netherlands is among the countries with a more enlightened attitude - the address file there is CC0. Phil [1] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/charter#scope On 13/06/2016 19:29, Rob Atkinson wrote: > Hi Phil > > this may or may not be relevant - but in Australia there is some > uncertainty about the use of postcodes, and what obligations would apply if > this was used in a web context - either as a service parameter or in a > response payload > > http://auspost.com.au/business-solutions/postcode-data.html > > says "You will need a licence to use the Australian postcode list for > commercial or business purposes." > > what if you had a dataset that had a postcode for every address - you could > reverse engineer the list of postcodes from any comprehensive address set. > > The issue is is not so much the licence regime, whatever you may think of > it, as the fact that the casual user or web developer would certainly not > expect such a situation arising from a publically owned service in the 21st > century - so i guess this is the sort of use case where the machinery needs > to be able to bring it to attention based on metadata. > > Cheers > Rob Atkinson > > On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 at 02:13 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> This isn't related to current work items within the WG but I believe it >> will be of relevance to at least some folks here. >> >> One of my other WGs is the Permissions and Obligations Expression WG who >> ask whether you have a use case arising from your work where you are >> hindered by a lack of info about the terms and conditions of use of some >> data. The group is collecting its use cases on its wiki [1] and deriving >> requirements [2]. They not starting from scratch. This work has a long >> history, including time as a Community Group, and the existing ODRL spec >> is well implemented [3], so we're looking for use cases that ODRL >> doesn't handle. >> >> Interestingly, the issue of subsetting came up today :-) >> >> Shout in my general direction for more info if needed. >> >> Cheers >> >> Phil >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases >> [2] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Requirements >> [3] https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/ >> >> -- >> >> >> Phil Archer >> W3C Data Activity Lead >> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ >> >> http://philarcher.org >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> @philarcher1 >> >> > -- Phil Archer W3C Data Activity Lead http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Monday, 4 July 2016 11:25:44 UTC