[Simon Hodson]

Dear all,
Thank you for an extremely interesting and productive discussion today. I felt that real progress was made. Please find below my notes from the call.
Dear all,
Thank you for an extremely interesting and productive discussion today. I felt that real progress was made. Please find below my notes from the call.
ACTIONS
> Willi will revise #2 Balance in the light of Paul’s redline document and Bob’s comments.
> Enrique and Gail will revise #5 Metadata in the light of the extensive discussion, possibly splitting it into two parts?
> Gail and Bernard will circulate an outline for #6 Attribution and Credit for next week’s call.
> Bernard has started a framework for #8 Responsibility and could share this too.
> Simon: Add Gail’s outline on metadata to the wiki. DONE
15-07-03-Legal Interoperability Call Notes
DISCUSSION OF PROGRESS WITH THE SECTIONS
To which section will Bob contribute? We did not answer this.
1-4 have been discussed but not necessarily finished.
5, Metadata has been started.
6. Attribution and Credit > Gail and Bernard > Gail has made a start, will have something by next Friday.
7. Equity > Paul
8. Responsibility > Bernard. Bernard has produced a skeleton outline for this, which he shared with Gail.
Agreed: Gail and Bernard will produce an outline for attribution and credit by next week, 10 July.
Agreed: Bernard has started a framework for 8 and could share this too.
DISCUSSION IG #2: Balance
Willi changed the order, without changing the content. Reformulated the recommendations. Paul has sent amendments which Willi is happy to accept.
Bob comments
4. Reduce time embargoes to the minimum: useful to indicate that the appropriate time embargo varies by discipline. Each community should try to express what is appropriate in their area of science.
3. Consider public and private interests in the light of open access to knowledge. Should include something on social science approaches to allow confidential data to be used.
Action: Willi to incorporate Paul’s amendments and Bob’s comments.
DISCUSSION #5 Metadata
Enrique and Gail have been working on metadata. Gail has put together an outline from her perspective.
Tried to narrow down to what points must be made. Anything else is gravy/superfluous. This has been shared with Enrique.
Gail tried to take a 30,000 foot view and determine what was really essential to avoid losing the forest for the trees.
How specific do we want to be in terms of recommendations?
Gail suggest that this work could evolve into a WG on metadata for rights statements.
Bernard: if metadata cannot be protected (legally) this should be stated/discussed upfront.
Bob: some publishers fiercely protect parts of metadata. We can promote the idea that metadata should be open. What we want to emphasise is the fact that metadata is important to users.
Important to be able to search on metadata that is open. Important also that the metadata should contain rights information.
Suggested structure is an attempt to simplify the approach because the current draft contains a lot of detail.
Gail: how prescriptive and forceful should we be about the assertion that metadata should be public. DPLA and Europeana community can require because they are an implementation: if you want to play, then you have to make the metadata public domain. RDA cannot assert in the same way.
Argues that metadata should be handled the same way as the way Willi handled research data.
Issues:
Do we discuss whether metadata is fact and therefore cannot be protected?
Do we make a strong recommendation that metadata should not (rather than cannot in law) be protected?
Bernard: concerned that there are different types of metadata. Observational data is one thing. Processed data is another. WRT the latter, for the metadata to be useful it has to contain so much information that making these parts of the metadata would give away intellectual property.
Gail: There can be protectable elements in data documentation. Supports the idea of making the recommendation that the metadata should be as open as possible, but some elements can be protected.
Bob: we need to be more specific. Categories of discovery metadata should be as open as possible. Bob agrees that some elements may be protected, but if publicly funded should be open.
Gail: some publicly funded research can be copyright of the research performing organisation. However, in the US this will change with the OSTP memo. This can get us into excessive detail?
Enrique: clearly some metadata – e.g. rights metadata is factual.
Need to be clear when we are talking about rights relating to metadata and metadata as an essential means of communicating rights status. Perhaps this requires the section to be split into two: metadata (as an object of rights) and metadata (as a means of communicating rights).
Bob: we should recommend that the metadata should state the license and the owner.
Gail: One element of a rights statement should be who owns the data, if known. DPLA / Europeana have 13 canonical rights statements. Should we point to these statements or adapt them/recommend them for research data.
WG Proposal on Model Rights Statements in the metadata for research data?
ACTION, All: Request that group should express views of level of detail to be included in the present implementation guidelines. Should we go to the level of detail to recommend specific rights statements or make a general statement and propose a new WG.
ACTION, Simon: Add Gail’s outline to the wiki.
___________________________
Geoffrey Boulton, ‘Open Data and the Future of Science’: http://www.codata.org/news/43/62/Geoffrey-Boulton-ANDS-Webinar-Open-Data…
Data Science Journal: http://datascience.codata.org/
___________________________
Dr Simon Hodson | Executive Director CODATA | http://www.codata.org
E-Mail: ***@***.*** | Twitter: @simonhodson99 | Skype: simonhodson99
Blog: http://www.codata.org/blog
Diary: http://bit.ly/simonhodson99-calendar
Tel (Office): +33 1 45 25 04 96 | Tel (Cell): +33 6 86 30 42 59
CODATA (ICSU Committee on Data for Science and Technology), 5 rue Auguste Vacquerie, 75016 Paris, FRANCE

Discussion