[talk-au] data.gov.au datasets and PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Sun Mar 26 01:02:22 UTC 2017

One member of the OSM community messaged me about a list of points to
include in letter to members of parliament.  I have prepared a draft
letter which incorporates some information from posts about CC BY 4.0.  
Anyone is welcome to  use the letter as it is or cut-and-paste and
re-write it to fit your circumstances and what you wish to convey to
your MP.  in my experience, politicians won't usually read more than one
page. For this reason I have drafted a one-page letter with an
attachment that provides more detail (most politicians won't read it but
hopefully the first page gets their support they will pass it on their
minions for analysis and action).   

Mr/Ms/Dr ............
Member for ...........
... (address) ........
......................

Dear   ..........

I wish to raise my concern about restrictions on the use of public data
and I request that you pursue this matter in your role as  Member of
Parliament.

Commonwealth, state and territory governments in Australia have moved
towards publishing public information as “open data” with the intent of
making it widely accessible. However there are continuing restrictions
that limit use of public data. 

I am a volunteer contributor to OpenStreetMap (www.openstreetmap.org)
which seeks to provide a map, based on open data, for use by anyone who
wishes to access it. I understand that OpenStreetMap is the largest open
data map project in the world. Various bodies, including some government
organisations, are increasingly using OpenStreetMap. However
OpenStreetMap is limited because many items of information are still
unavailable except with copyright restrictions.  Information about the
restrictions is included in the attachment to this letter.

Some governments (New South Wales, South Australia and Australian
Capital Territory) and individual Commonwealth departments/agencies
have, after special consideration, granted explicit permission to use
their data but much data remains inaccessible to OpenStreetMap.

In contrast, the United States federal government policy is that all
government data is published into the public domain without any licence
restrictions.

Therefore I write to ask that you pursue this matter with a view to the 
.... (Commonwealth or name of state or territory)....  Government
adopting the United States federal government model whereby all
published government data is entirely in the public  domain and is
offered free and without restriction.

Yours sincerely

_______________________________

Attachment with information about copyright restrictions on public data.

OpenStreetMap is published under the Open Data Commons Open Database
License (ODbL) which is not directly compatible with the Creative
Commons licence chosen by governments. For OpenStreetMap, the
difficulties relate to requirements regarding attributing the sources of
data and application of restrictive technical measures. Other users of
government data may have other problems with the licence restrictions.

While one might suggest that it is not unreasonable to be required to
attribute data to its source, it can become problematic in some cases.
For example, if a project utilises data from multiple sources, it can be
onerous to attribute particular items to the applicable data sources. I
understand that the earlier versions of the Creative Commons by
Attribution licence may have required that a map, with data from
multiple sources, have each place name, road, river, mountain etc
accompanied by attribution to its particular source. This of course
would result in a map that would be covered with attributions and
therefore largely unusable as a map. The most recent version of the
licence seeks to reduce the onus and refers to making each attribution
"in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context” in
which the licensed material is shared. However the user of data is still
required to retain a substantial amount of information if it is supplied
with the licensed material including "(i) identification of the
creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive
attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor
(including by pseudonym if designated); (ii) a copyright notice; (iii) a
notice that refers to this Public License; (iv) a notice that refers to
the disclaimer of warranties; (v) a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed
Material to the extent reasonably practicable." The user is also
required to (1) indicate if the Licensed Material has been modified and
retain an indication of any previous modifications; and (2) indicate the
licensed material is licensed under the particular public license, and
include the text of, or link to, the license.
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode)

A user has no certainty that what she or he considers to be “in any
reasonable manner ..." will be what the data owner considers
appropriate. OpenStreetMap acknowledges that data is obtained from many
sources and these are listed on its "Contributors Page"
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors) but data donors are
not identified with each applicable data item on the map.

It has also been identified that the ODbL license and Creative Commons
(CC BY 4.0) licence have slightly different ways of  addressing digital
rights management technologies. The ODbL allows data users to apply
technical protection measures to their own works so long as they also
provide an unrestricted version of the underlying database, including
their own additions ("parallel distribution"). In contrast, CC BY 4.0
can be read to prohibit any application of technical protection measures
to databases that include CC BY material. This is a relatively minor
difference in how the licenses are drafted, but means that in some
cases, users who comply with ODbL might not comply with CC BY 4.0.

While governments’ open data policies have sought to make data widely
available and accessible, the licence remains a restriction that impedes
use by OpenStreetMap. Some governments (New South Wales, South Australia
and Australian Capital Territory) and individual Commonwealth
departments/agencies have, after special consideration, granted explicit
permission to use their data but much data remains inaccessible to
OpenStreetMap.

In contrast, the Government of the United States issues all its data
into the public domain without any licence or other restrictions. It is
stated eloquently on the website of the U.S. Census Bureau : "All U.S.
Census Bureau materials, regardless of the media, are entirely in the
public domain. There are no user fees, site licenses, or any special
agreements etc for the public or private use, and or reuse of any census
title. As tax funded product, it's all in the public record"
(https://ask.census.gov/). Similar notices appear with all U.S. Federal
Government Data. Under the heading "Licensing", the United States
data.gov website carries the clear and explicit statement that "U.S.
Federal data available through data.gov is offered free and without
restriction" (https://www.data.gov/privacy-policy#license).  

The United States federal government model is recommended for adoption
by Australian Commonwealth, State and Territory  governments so that all
published government data is entirely in the public domain and is
offered free and without restriction.

_______________________________________________________

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017, at 10:12 AM, cleary wrote:
> 
> A few months ago, I wrote to the Department of Prime Minister and
> Cabinet seeking access to datasets published by data.gov.au including
> the PSMA Administrative Boundaries. The response was that "due to the
> large number of datasets on data.gov.au and, in some instances,
> obligations on the government due to its licensing arrangements with its
> data suppliers, we are unable to amend the licence terms, or provide
> exemptions on an individual basis."
> 
> Since clarification of OSM's requirements relating to data published
> under the CC BY 4.0 licence, I have written again asking if there is any
> possibility of reconsideration but I am not hopeful that the response
> will be positive. I also requested that the limitations of the CC BY 4.0
> licence be addressed in the context of any future review of Government
> policy regarding community access to public data. 
> 
> If I receive any helpful response, I will share the information on the
> talk-au list.
> 
> In regard to Commonwealth Government agencies, the best approach appears
> to be submission of requests to individual agencies - as has been done
> successfully with the Department of the Environment and Energy and with
> GeoScience Australia.
> 
> In regard to the PSMA boundaries, it appears that the data owners are
> the respective state and territory governments. I think we have access
> to that data in ACT, NSW and SA and it will be necessary to get
> permission from the other state and territory governments for their
> boundaries data. The data owners are listed at
> https://www.psma.com.au/psma-data-copyright-and-disclaimer    
> 
> As far as I can ascertain, in the United States, the US federal
> government policy (adopted also by some but not not yet by all states of
> the US) is that data collected with taxpayers' money is published in the
> public domain without any copyright restrictions. Our government is keen
> to follow the United States in many areas, and I suggest keen Aussie
> mappers may like to send letters or emails to their local members of
> parliament, both federal and also in states where we don't yet have
> access to data, highlighting difficulties with licences such as CC BY
> and commending the American approach to copyright on government data, so
> that public data is truly open.  You can point out that it won't cost
> them money -  and while government would be making a compromise on
> attribution, most users will still choose to attribute the source in
> some way in order to attest to its authenticity and accuracy.  It is
> unlikely to get immediate results but we can tell them now and tell them
> again at election time so that we are planting seeds that may germinate
> when the issue is reviewed at government level.  When politicians come
> door-knocking at election time, tell them about OSM and how concerned
> you are about  the current copyright restrictions on public data. That
> is, of course, if the copyright restrictions on public data bother you
> as much as they vex me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au