User digestLicenses, open policies

Federico MorandoNexa Center for Internet & Society, Politecnico di Torino – fellow

Creative Commons Italia – public lead

Wikimania 2016, Esino Lario – June 25, 2006

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 2

copyright 101● from Wikipedia

● “Copyright is a legal right [...] that grants the creator of an original work exclusive rights for its use and distribution”

● copyright “default rule”:● full protection (“all rights reserved”)

– maximum duration (typically: life + 70 years)

● no formality required (not even the ©)

● generalised by Berne Convention● and enforced via WTO trade agreements

● the “iron law of default inertia” works toward “all rights reserved”

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 3

corollary to © 101● copyright default rule = all rights reserved

● “copyright” in a broad sense– droit d'auteur– sui generis database right, etc.

● without a clear statement to “opt out”● content and data locked data

– unless exceptions and limitations apply– unless content and data in the public domain

● assumption that everything is forbidden● wrong, but reasonable

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 4

open licensing 101● open content and data “require” open licenses

● otherwise, risk of legal uncertainty

● “license” ↔ give permission● a promise (by the licensor) not to sue (the licensee)

– as long as certain conditions are respected

● “open” in the sense of the Open Definition● “Open means anyone can freely access, use, modify, and

share for any purpose (subject, at most, to requirements that preserve provenance and openness).” or

– “Open data and content can be freely used, modified, and shared by anyone for any purpose”

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 5

choosing a license● when institutions develop an open policy, a lot of

discussions concern the choice of the best license● suggestion:

● “legal interoperability” as guiding principle– possibility of (legally) mixing content and data coming from

different sources (e.g. government data, UGC, corporate data)– and using them within a broad range of projects and business (and

community) models

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 6

a view on license interoperability complexity

● given the original license (on the lines)● can I use a given standard license (on the columns) for a

“derivative” work/DB?

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 7

zooming on license interoperability

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 8

most open licensees OK to feed Wikipedia...

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 9

more challenging task with Wikidata...

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 10

universal donors

● Creative Commons Zero (CC0)● Public Domain Dedication or License (PDDL)● tagging of public domain content with the PDMark

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 11

do we have universal receivers?

● strictly speaking, no● (rectius: keeping the data within you firm's secret

datacenter)

● amongst open licenses, CC BY-SA is arguably the best candidate

● could safely be used to publish derivative works of any Public Domain or Attribution waiver/license

● considering the amount of available content and data is the first candidate for any “interoperability clause” in other SA licenses

– Art Libre License– GNU FDL (temporary) interop.; IODL 1.0

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 12

non-commercial reminder● the NC debate characterizes the first phases of

most “re-use friendly” initiatives● de facto, the NC licenses are only compatible with other NC

licenses

● always remind (to your institution) some basic things

● Non-Commercial → no (standard) business models● NC also → no (open) communities

– impossible to re-use for non-profit groups including Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects, OpenStreetMap, etc.

● Non-Commercial → NO Wikipedia (DBPedia) & NO OpenStreetMap

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 13

rights clearance

the “serious” problem is not choosing a licence

being sure that one may lawfully apply it to a piece of content is the actual challenge

nemo plus iuris transferre potest quam ipse habet

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 14

Case 1: Open Data in Italy● public servants manage our own assets

● most of the time, they are in good faith– personally, they frequently like the idea that their work is made

more useful → pro openness and re-use

● yet, they may need to be reassured– going step-by-step may work (OR not: keep “leave” as option)

● Italian Open Data License “psychological evolution”

● IODL Beta version: like CC BY-NC-SA● IODL 1.0 version: like CC BY-SA● IODL 2.0 version: like CC BY

June 25, 2016 User digest/Licenses, open policies 15

Case 2: Open GLAM in Italy● Italy (as Greece and Turkey) has a peculiar

Cultural Heritage Law● creating a kind of intellectual property right on cultural

heritage goods extending to their pictures– applies also to monuments (no “panorama freedom”)

● the Internet/digital revolution, together with much lobbying in public interest, achieved some results

● liberalizing personal reproduction, but also publication (online), as long as commercial reuse is prevented

● current goal● let the Ministry understand that reciprocity (SA) is nicer

and more productive than non-commercial (NC)

Grazie!

presentation available and re-usableunder a Creative Commons BY 4.0 license

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.it