Comments on: Nature’s response to IsItOpenData http://science.okfn.org/2010/11/26/natures-response-to-isitopendata/ Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:50:10 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.3.2 By: Egon Willighagen http://science.okfn.org/2010/11/26/natures-response-to-isitopendata/#comment-20 Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:50:10 +0000 http://science.okfn.org/?p=48#comment-20 About that YES on 4 (“May the extracted data be used as Open Data [1,2] without discrimination against users, groups, or fields of endeavor?”) and 5 (“May users expose the extracted data as Open Data [1,2], in a manner consistent with the Panton Principles (https://pantonprinciples.org/)? Specifically, may they expose the extracted data on the internet under a Public Domain, PDDL (http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/) or CC0 waiver (http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0)?”).

I am wondering if that answer should not really be a NO. That is, they clearly write that if you extract significant data, you still require permisson. That does not sound like Open Data to me.

Do you agree with Nature that their answer is really YES, instead of NO or YES/NO? If so, what arguments would you give for that? If not, why do you think their answer does not open the doors for discrimination against users, groups, or fields of endeavor?

]]>