W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > March 2017

Re: Comments on how to represent licenses in ontologies (and on the licenses themselves)

From: Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 06:56:59 -0700
Cc: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, Simon.Cox@csiro.au, rgarcia@fi.upm.es, public-sdw-wg@w3.org, vrodriguez@fi.upm.es
Message-Id: <6B6F93EE-A372-4B04-B2E5-819AF8CFD7DD@opengeospatial.org>
To: Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
OGC will be reviewing in its Planning Committee  the license terms for the joint work with W3C (specifically RDF ontologies). Yes, “all rights reserved” is common, but obsolete and meaningless and thus does not contradict the remainder of a license.

Scott

> On Mar 6, 2017, at 6:00 AM, Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com> wrote:
> 
> Apparently that phrase has no legal significance. OGC could remove it but it probably isn't worth the time and expense to do so. 
> 
> --Josh
> 
>> On Mar 6, 2017, at 07:33, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I checked internally (for related ACTION-273). I confirm that it is fine to add a license statement to ontology files and that the right W3C license to use is the W3C Software License:
>> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2015/copyright-software-and-document
>> 
>> Also, the recommendation is not to mix that license with another similar license, such as the OGC one, to avoid confusing people.
>> 
>> Francois.
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au]
>>> Sent: Monday, March 6, 2017 12:11 PM
>>> 
>>> OGC have had lawyers involved in drafting the license, but I tend to agree
>>> that All Rights Reserved does not immediately appear consistent with the
>>> other provisions. I've flicked this on to OGC to see if there is an explanation.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Raúl García Castro [mailto:rgarcia@fi.upm.es]
>>> Sent: Monday, 6 March, 2017 19:19
>>> To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Víctor Rodríguez Doncel
>>> <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es>
>>> Subject: Comments on how to represent licenses in ontologies (and on the
>>> licenses themselves)
>>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> I just finished ACTION-274 and updated the wiki with the comments from my
>>> colleague Víctor Rodríguez Doncel on the representation of licenses in the
>>> ontologies and on the analysis of both licenses.
>>> 
>>> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Ontology_rights_and_licence#Comm
>>> ents_from_V.C3.ADctor_Rodr.C3.ADguez_Doncel
>>> 
>>> In short:
>>> * Using cc:license or dct:license is a common practice and suffices.
>>> * Both licenses are essentially the same (but the OGC one contains a
>>> contradiction).
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> Dr. Raúl García Castro
>>> http://www.garcia-castro.com/
>>> 
>>> Ontology Engineering Group
>>> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
>>> Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Informáticos Universidad Politécnica
>>> de Madrid Campus de Montegancedo, s/n - Boadilla del Monte - 28660
>>> Madrid
>>> Phone: +34 91 336 65 96 - Fax: +34 91 352 48 19
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 6 March 2017 13:57:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 6 March 2017 13:57:33 UTC