11

The content of a database is generally covered under copyright law, so broadly speaking… no. You cannot assume that copying and re-use is implicitly allowed by default. Almost all major countries follow the Berne Convention. In the US (for example), almost everything published after April 1989 is considered "copyrighted" by default and protected ...


10

Ideally, like @Andrew - OpenGeoCode mentions, you would release it in multiple formats. I would really suggest you look into organizing it into a e-book written in Markdown and hosted on Github. There are several advantages to this such as a built-in change log, being able to let people to (publicly) fork your document(s) and share their changes with the ...


8

Yes, it is possible, using the Google Places API. Just for completeness sake: This is most definitely not open data. For an open alternative, have a look at Phil's answer about Open Street Maps. If your usage complies with Google's terms depends on what exactly you plan to do with the data. I guess section 10.1.3 of the Google Maps/Google Earth APIs Terms of ...


7

Each of the datasets on Data.gov describes the license used (see the upper left items on the dataset page). The intent for data provided by the U.S. Government (whether it is on Data.gov or not) is to have an open license, as defined by Project Open Data. The license field in the Data.gov metadata schema is defined as well. In most cases, the license is "...


7

The Massachusetts Open Data Initiative seems to provide only a link to the data, not the data themselves. Their terms of use couldn't be really applied here. The terms and conditions of the Massachusetts Archives website refer to the documents, not to their data collections. As to historical vital records, this page states that "[t]he Archives' collections ...


7

Quick answer with what comes to my mind. They might be several others. Advantages Since you lower the barrier to access the data (no more scraping), you will see more people using it and new usage of your data will appear You will also receive feedback regarding your data quality (since there is more eyes looking at it under different angles) This can be a ...


7

Yes. CKAN is licensed under Affero GNU GPL v3.0. From the preamble to the license: When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you ...


6

The other suggestions on here are great, and I would echo the recommendation to consider Github if you want people to be able to easily edit your product for creating their own versions. This will also help you track the edits that have been made so you can learn more about what people do with your manuals. If you want to learn more about the definitions ...


6

It seems like http://echoprint.me/ is the service you want: Echoprint is a music fingerprint or music identification service. It listens to music signals and tells you what song is playing. It’s backed by a huge database of music that grows with the community and further partnerships. On launch we’ve partnered with Musicbrainz. ... Does ...


5

I believe minopret is incorrect on the use restriction of UN/LOCODE to non-commercial use w/o permission. There is no where on the UNECE site that indicates such a restriction. All the verbage would indicate the contrary. The terms of use simply indicate that the material is w/o warranty and the user will indemify the UN. This statement can be found on the ...


5

yes. the less barriers to accessibility, the easier it is to be consumed. the same principle applies to content. open.all.the.things.


5

On the licensing questions, you'd want to retain an IP attorney. Everyone above is correct to state that works by the US government are explicitly excluded under US Copyright Act protection, but there are several exceptions depending on how the data was collected, sourced, or modified by non-US government actors. For example, another issue Malamud has taken ...


5

This site helps to calculate the cost of living in different parts of the United States. There's a caveat about the fidelity and comprehensiveness of the data ("Consider the results a minimum cost threshold that serves as a benchmark, but only that."). For licensing, the site references that it is part of the Living Wage Project. However, in looking ...


5

After doing some searching it seems that the Moby Project is in the public domain, and they have a POS corpus. However, it's simply a dictionary so it doesn't help with words that have multiple POS. Also it's not encoded in ASCII so opening it up in a text editor, it's hard to read. Will obviously require pre-processing before it can be useful. I will ...


5

Literal answer The Sui generis database right. It is a property right granted in several countries to creators, compilers or curators of databases. Prose answer To address your single points, here have some more text. Owning factual data: Probably not possible. License based on structure: yes, but for that, you must first have used suitables data sources ...


4

here's more of an opinion, not an answer: i'm free software all the way, and i wouldn't give a care to what their terms say, i'd do whatever i pleased with it, until they killed the service. in reality, corporations will destroy you, unless you have an army of lawyers too. look how broken the patent system is, or the hacker that exposed a public url and ...


4

Surprisingly, I can find no mention of license/patent/rights in the Hyperloop Alpha PDF published by Musk in 2013. In a tweet, Musk stated: I really hate patents unless critical to company survival. Will publish Hyperloop as open source. I sent an email to hyperloop@teslamotors.com inquiring. I'll update this answer if I hear back.


4

I have contacted NOAA directly with this question, and the answer was (emphasis mine): As you have described it below, you are not in violation of Resolution 40. This would apply if you are redistributing the data as-is for profit. If you are unsure about your particular use case, I suggest contacting NOAA directly.


4

Assuming you comply with the license as regards attribution and labelling (ie, you indicate the author + the license in an appropriate way, such as an image caption) then you are free to do this. The CC license distinguishes between "derivative works"(1a), which need to get the CC-BY-SA license, and "collective works" (1c), which don't. Including one CC-BY-...


4

Creative Commons sure seems to think so; they just launched a new initiative called open business models: Open Business Models – Call For Participation http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/45022 Open Business Models, Open Data, and the Public Interest http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/45417 Open Data tags found on Creative Commons site: http://...


3

Creative Commons ShareAlike 1.0 Generic (CC SA 1.0) should match all of your requirements. However, CC SA 1.0 has been retired by Creative Commons in 2004 due to inadequate demand, and they recommend using one of their current licenses instead.


3

The requirement that modified versions of the documents have the "same level of openness" was added after my first answer. If that is not a requirement, and you just want to throw the documentation into the world to be used however people want without attribution, you should release the documents as public domain/creative commons zero. If a "share alike" ...


3

This is not RDFa, but rather embedded RDF/XML, which is allowed by the SVG Tiny 1.2 Specification. There are the following errors: <cc:license> instead of <cc:License> in lines 26, 29 and 30, 33. The former is a property, the latter is a class. <cc:attributionName rdf:resource="Laurent Notarianni and LittleMap.org" /> <cc:...


3

It might be consider illegal. Autofilling captcha is a blackhat toolbox and in most of the cases you should avoid it. The best thing you can do is read the "term of uses" of the site and if you cannot find anything there, then you can always contact with them and ask for a certain reason to send you the data directly.


3

The answer depends heavily on the context of you work and on potential users of your data. First, there is no "must" about sharing your dataset. If the users want to get out more data than your website/app would allow them to do, they could always go to the original sources as they've been doing previously. Secondly, if you decide to share your data (be ...


3

It depends. In the US, facts are not eligible for copyright, but other countries do have 'database rights'.


3

Do you know specifically who will be editing your manual or you plan to open them and see what happen? If you already have contact with potential editor and contributor, just ask them what makes sense to them. Markdown and Github is a great option if you community knows how to use them.


3

I think the world is moving towards open data, the sooner you get on the wagon the better. If someone needs your data they're going to use 1001 trick to get it and if you want to stop them you'd probably end up in a legal battle where only the lawyers win!


3

For licensing and ease-of-use purposes, you are better going with Open Street Maps. See, for example, these answers about how to use the data. Extract data about golf courses Restaurants in the EU ATM locations in the UK Embassies around the world You can download all the OSM data (instructions) or use one of the several public APIs or prepacked databases (...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible