I have a data licensing question concerning the two most popular data licenses:
CC BY and ODC BY.
The main differences are written here:
What is the difference between the Open Data Commons licenses and the CC 4.0 licenses?
The Open Database License (ODbL) and the Open Data Commons Attribution License (ODC-BY) are licenses designed specifically for use on databases and not on other types of material. There are many differences between those licenses and CC licenses, but the most important to be aware of relate to license scope and operation. The ODC licenses apply only to sui generis database rights and any copyright in the database structure, they do not apply to the individual contents of the database. The latest version of the CC licenses on the other hand apply to sui generis database rights and all copyright and neighboring rights in the database structure as well as the contents. (See above for more detail about how past versions of CC licenses vary with respect to sui generis database rights.)
Another important difference is that ODC licenses may create contractual obligations even in jurisdictions where database rights would not otherwise exist and but for the license permission would not be necessary. CC has crafted its licenses to ensure that they never impose obligations where permission is not otherwise required to use the licensed material.
Thanks to everyone for their feedback on the licenses and their help with the project. We can now announce a new license to the Open Data Commons family, the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY) license. This is a database specific license requiring attribution for databases. This makes ODC-BY similar to the Creative Commons Attribution license, but is built specifically for databases. As a legal tool that only requires attribution, it complies with the Open Knowledge Definition, the Open Knowledge Foundation‘s standard around defining the rights behind what something means to be “open”.
So I am looking for Pros and Cons for these two (open data)!
CC BY
The latest version of the CC licenses on the other hand apply to sui generis database rights and all copyright and neighboring rights in the database structure as well as the contents
Pro:
Well known name and wide use
Large community with regular license updates
Possibility to adapt to new legislation* …
Con:
Not specific for open data
…
ODC BY
The ODC licenses apply only to sui generis database rights and any copyright in the database structure, they do not apply to the individual contents of the database.
Pro:
Aliprandi (2012) is a little dated regarding new licenses and current licensing terms, but nonetheless provides useful background to many of the issues involved. HTH, Robbie
The recommendation is that the ODC‑By license be retired and its use replaced by the Creative Commons CC‑BY‑4.0 license in all situations where an attribution license is required (Lämmerhirt 2017).
That recommendation comes from Open Knowledge Foundation research coordinator Danny Lämmerhirt, whose employer originally developed and published the ODC‑By license.
Thank you all for this interesting exchange and for the provided resources.
Sorry for making this thread poping up again but I was wondering: @robbie.morrison, is this recommendation still relevant ? If so, perhaps your last message could be added to the Openmod guide to choosing a licence (data), what do you think ?
Another question regarding this open data licence choice: for public domain data sets, would you then recommend a CC0, or a PDDL licence ?
From the previous source (Lämmerhirt 2017) :
It should be noted that CC0 and CC BY 4.0 are possibly the most commonly used legal tools and are best suited for public sector information"
@sacha.hodencq Data license recommendations form part of a long running discussion within our community. And my voice is only one among many. But I believe that license interoperability is key and has not always been given sufficient attention. In the yet‑to‑be‑submitted Data Act feedback, I recently wrote the following paragraph:
The debate on choice of license rarely looks at the question of legal interoperability. Rather, the merits of individual classes of license are debated and then the merits of individual licenses. This same discussion takes place within our community too. But this approach tackles the problem from the wrong end. Instead, license interoperability must be a paramount consideration.
Therefore this comparability graph should be centre stage:
Worth noting too that the European Commission is increasingly using CC‑BY‑4.0 licensing. And that it is also the default on Zenodo.
When a consensus does form, we should go through the various openmod documentation and make it consistent. Until then, I myself will not edit and overwrite the views of others on this important question. HTH R
Thanks for this answer, so it seems this is still an hot-point topic, not to be frozen on the wiki yet. And sorry, I realise that my “what do you think?” question seemed exclusive: it is open to all contributions
