|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | Re: [gislist] Protocol for citing sources of data? - an example |
| Date: |
01/14/2007 05:25:01 PM |
| From: |
andrea giacomelli |
|
|
Jeremy,
As far as I know, there is no general consenus on the topic you pose - but
rather than looking for consesus you should inquire with licensing
typologies for data, remembering that data providers have done the same
before you.
Also, in my opinion, the question you pose is too open to get you a straight
reply, and the community may think you are trying to re-engineer stolen
cars.
In an different (and more positive) interpretation I can give to your
question, I would rather think you are trying to understand how to expose
and provide proper acknowledgement for processing you may perform on a given
data set, to produce "derivative"/updated data.
An example:
you acquire a data package from a provide, including a road network, place
name data, and land use for the region where you live, because you need it
for a presentation, and you want to save time to prepare some maps.
you load the data on your beautiful preferred viewer, and you note blatant
errors in the spelling of place names, and even more interesting errors in
land use (specifically, a 2000 square km natural park area is classified as
"urban").
but you need to have the correct data, for your presentation! T.B.I.C.! (the
boss is coming...he signed the purchase order for the data set, and he lives
right next to the park which the map does not show)...you need to do
something...
you integrate the data sets by correcting the data (e.g. fix spelling issues
in place names, which have not been attentively QA/QCed by the data
provider, as this lives in a country different than yours).
....you have modified the data, with original work....would that make the
whole data set yours ?....I don't think so.
but *the updates* are your original work, so you should again look into your
preferred way to "protect" it...(copyleft, copyright etc. etc. etc.).
if the changes you propose are significant, there well may be a case to talk
to the data provider and see if you can get an acknowledgement for this...
...your case may still be different, but I hope this discussion helps as
food for thought.
regards to all
andrea giacomelli
http://pibinko.altervista.org
p.s. a good set metadata with updated lineage information will not hurt, in
any case.
p.p.s. the example presented above refers to an actual business case which
we had in a project in 2001....if anybody is interested to know how the
story went, I'll be glad to share the ending.
----- Original Message -----
From: <DickBoyd@aol.com>
To: <jeremy_olynik@hotmail.com>: < gislist@lists.geocomm.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: [gislist] Protocol for citing sources of data?
>
> In a message dated 1/12/2007 9:21:17 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> jeremy_olynik@hotmail.com writes:
>
> I'm wondering if there is a general consensus out there when it comes to
> the
>
> issue of having to reference sources of data and what constitutes
> ownership
> of data. At what point do we no longer have to cite the source of, for
> example, imagery. How much do we have to change the appearance or
> composition of a data layer (vector layer) in order for it to become an
> original and no longer someone else's work?
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
gislist mailing list
gislist@lists.geocomm.com
http://lists.geocomm.com/mailman/listinfo/gislist
_________________________________
This list is brought to you by
The GeoCommunity
http://www.geocomm.com/
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
