[Simon Hodson]

Dear all,
Please find below, my fairly rough notes from today’s call.
The key actions were:
All: comment in writing on P3 Harmonisation by COB Wed 19 August.
Enrique: send phrasing on public domain for P1 Access and Reuse
Simon: incorporate this and make distinction between conditions and restrictions in P1 Access and Reuse
Willi: to apply changes from previous calls to P2 Balance
Gail and Enrique to liaise on Gail’s comments on P5 Metadata and then to send round agreed text which will also be placed in the wiki to be discussed next week.
Next week, 21 August will be: P5 Metadata (Enrique and Gail) and P7 Equity (Paul)
Best wishes,
Simon.
15-08-14-Legal Interoperability Call – Notes
Principle [Four]: Harmonisation
Enrique’s introduction: Level of focus? Focus on legal issues or agreements and culture of scientific communities? Enrique tried to solve this issue by focussing on mechanisms for change.
Suggestion is to have transparency and certainty as P3 and Harmonisation as P4. Agreed. I have changed this in the wiki.
Do we need something about copyright self help movement?
Need to clarify what sort of norms we are talking about. Clarify that these are community norms rather than legal norms.
Codes of best practice and normative practice perhaps can be combined. Adopting codes of best practice can drive changes in law around conditions of fair use? Can we say normative practice and codes of best practice under the same heading. This would include any worthwhile example of self help movements.
‘Community norms and best practices’. Next text is fine except for the text on ‘suspension of loss of professional license to practice, or loss of employment)’.
Collapse fair use and limitations? Because fair use is a limitations? Or do we want fair use listed separately. Agreement on the latter. Fair use deserves its own heading.
Middle section ‘Guidelines for Implementation’ > Group to comment in writing.
Recommendations
Are improved and more direct.
ACTION > send written comments to Enrique, particularly on the middle section by COB Wed 19 August
Principle One: Access and Reuse, Simon
Are the definitions OK? Do we need clear definitions at the outset of various licences, of licence, waiver of rights, public domain dedication?
Need to be clear in our distinction between conditions and restrictions. Attribution and user registration are conditions. Once these conditions have been met the user if free to use the data as they wish. This is not the same as a restriction. Agreed: Simon to change the text to make this distinction clear.
Bernard’s point about public domain. Public domain means that the data can be used by anyone, anywhere, anyplace without permission, licence or royalty payment. Link this to Bob’s point. Add this to the definition of public domain.
ACTION > Enrique to send the text for this phrasing.
Issue of NC? Do we need an additional discussion of NC? NC is ruled out by our principle of legal interoperability. However, not using NC may have consequence with which researchers are uncomfortable. I’m not sure what the agreement was on this? Do we need an additional discussion of the issues around commercial reuse of data?
Willi: text is much clearer.
Need to harmonise language throughout the document. Particularly in relation to the mention of waivers, licences and stock language/phrases.
Principle Two: Balance, Willi
CBD, Convention on Biological Diversity. Enrique to send information for incorporation.
Need a better definition of copyright protection. Need some definition that makes clear this extends to data and software.
ACTION > Willi still needs to implement changes from previous calls.
Principle Five: Metadata, Enrique and Gail
Grounds for further work (e.g. RDA WG) on the basis of some of the discussions here.
Metadata that does not have machine readable rights metadata is not good enough for legal interoperability.
How do you fill those fields? There are rights statements optimised for human readers and rights expression language that is optimised for machines. Need to maintain and clarify this distinction.
Rights fields needs to be completed with rights statements. Human readable rights statements (e.g. Europeana) and REL (encoded for computers).
Gail recommends collapsing 3 and 4 into something more generalisable.
Paul: structural comment. For the last four, the implementation guidelines header – needs to be a section on recommendations at the end that is more focussed for each of these sections.
Need to consider the new principle as well as the main text.
ACTION > Gail and Enrique to liaise on Gail’s comments and then to round agreed text to be placed in the wiki and to be discussed next week.
Next week, 21 August will be: P5 Metadata (Enrique and Gail) and P7 Equity (Paul)
Final week, 28 August, will be: P6 Attribution and Credit (Gail and Bernard) and 8 Responsibility (Bernard)
___________________________
Call for Applications: World Social Science Fellows, Big Data in Urban Contexts, deadline 24 August 2015: http://www.codata.org/news/50/62/Call-for-Applications-World-Social-Scie…
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