On 16/02/17 09:08, Sarah Callaghan wrote:
> We’d prefer if users came to us to download the data, a) so we can track
> usage and b) so they’re getting the data they expect, not a slightly
> different, slightly fiddled with version.
>
> Does anyone know of any licenses similar to CC or OGL that allow for
> free use, but don’t allow users to redistribute the original dataset?
> (distributing their modified version is fine as Share Alike)
You say you (or your user) want to forbid verbatim distribution to
protect the data's integrity, but also that you're happy for others to
distribute slightly different, slightly fiddled with versions? Doesn't
that rather defeat the point?
I'd make 'open' a point of principle. Rely on community norms and
requiring attribution, and in practice I suspect that nothing will go
terribly wrong.
Have a look at
<https://datapub.cdlib.org/2013/04/24/closed-data-excuses-excuses/> and
the linked Google Doc. I don't think we have anything about integrity,
but there might be other points (e.g. around misrepresentation) that are
useful to assuage your users' worries.
Yours,
Alex
--
Alexander Dutton
Data Architect in Residence; Identity and Access Management
Linked Open Data Architect; Data and Information Architecture
IT Services, University of Oxford | 📞 01865 (6)13483
|