Yes, there is: the Open Definition defines openness for data (and content). The Definition was produced in 2005, heavily based on the Open Source Definition, and revised minimally since.
The key part of the Open Definition states:
A dataset [work] is open if its manner of distribution satisfies the following
conditions, which simultaneously delimit the ...
There's a big difference between “available to the public” and “belonging to the public”. By accessing a privately-owned website, you are accepting its terms and conditions. These conditions typically preclude scraping and aggregation. Here's an example from Amazon's (Canada) Licence and Access terms:
Subject to your compliance with these Conditions
of Use ...
Example: I only know of the company Cloudmade because they provide (a now outdated, but fine at the time) download portal of ready-to-use shapefiles derived from OSM data. Though this service might have helped its competitors, they probably earned much more in terms of visibility, which might spawn e.g. development contracts for custom-made solutions.
The Wikipedia page for Open Data states it better than I can. That is, open data should be:
... freely available to everyone to use and republish as they wish,
without restrictions from copyright, patents or other mechanisms of
To answer your question, truly "open" data should certainly be free as in speech. I would say, however, that open ...
Mendeley does not seem to grant me any license to reuse the content (in particular the academic papers uploaded by other users), so by default the data must be considered closed: We are not allowed to redistribute it. Even if an API allows us to retrieve it:
You may not use our Services to [...] download, use or re-use any Academic Papers without ...
All open data are good, but some are better.
In a colloquial way: open means that everyone can use it, for any purpose. The idea is that you have as few technical, financial and legal barriers as possible.
Quite a popular definition is the one from the OKF:
“A piece of data or content is open if anyone is free to use, reuse, and redistribute it — ...
One reason to open your data is that the people who may be using the data may not be your competitors; by putting it out there for other people to use, there may be people who are able to find interesting uses for your data that you might not have considered.
In the case of science data, the ultimate goal should not be to make a profit, but to make a ...
They are not the same at all. Datasets are Open if they are available under a free license to everyone. Datasets are Big if... well, they are. Typically big beyond where common software can handle them in real time.
For example Facebook and Google work with Big Data that is not Open.
Most Open Data sets are actually an example of Small Data: The datasets ...
I think your question has two distinct aspects:
What might be considered to be an "Open" dataset?
What are the best practices for publishing data to the web?
To some extent these are orthogonal, e.g. there are best practices for publishing data that don't specifically relate to its licensing.
I think there are already clear answers to the first part. ...
To quote from the Open Definition v2.0:
The work shall be available as a whole and at no more than a reasonable one-time reproduction cost, preferably downloadable via the Internet without charge. […]
So no, what you describe is not Open Data according to the Open Definition.
So if you compare Open Data to Open Source, than Open* seems to be a good strategy to survive in a small market segment. Some typical advantages can be
in case of collaborative work - open is much easier in many dimensions
in case of collecting additional data from your customers - the enhance of your data quality. Thats maybe valuable to you?
in case of ...
The state of Washington adopted a standard for data classification that has worked pretty well for us:
(1) Category 1 - Public Information
Public information is information that can be or currently is released to the public. It does not need protection from unauthorized disclosure, but does need integrity and availability protection controls.
(2) Category ...
That's a great question. Seems like the data itself is under an open license but the company charges for API access to it, presumably for the effort they've gone to consolidate the data and for running the API service. See the legal info https://opencorporates.com/legal/licence and in particular the "The OpenCorporates database" section of the page.
Data obtained through FOIA is open data. Before it was attained, I would argue that it is not, as it was not being released.
Data previously published on a government website was and still is in the public domain and open data. There maybe tiny exceptions here regarding privacy issues, etc., so think through what you are going to republish, but again, it ...
I think it depends of the nature of the site, not only the terms and conditions. In the case of privately owned health medicine information, it could be an exception because of the nature itself of information or in the case of government site with all rights reserved default license, it could be argued that there is enough legal ground to try particular ...
There is also the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/
The ODbL states that:
You are free to share, create and adapt the database, as long as you attribute, share-alike and keep thee database open.
The ODbL is used by the Open Street Map project.
In the OSM Wiki they have some resources about the ODbL and why they use ...
I would say that open data is free as in speech - not as in beer. @Snubian's quote from the wikipedia page is a good starting point. But free actually means subsidised - because it is never free to collate, check, record & store meaningful data over any length of time. So there has to be a motive to maintain the quality of open data if it isn't to ...
As others have mentioned the visibility is important.
It also gives you a chance to benefit from the work of the crowd.
If you are a large company, then your competitive advantage is probably one of a few market disciplines: operational excellence, customer intimacy, or product innovation.
Of course you should look at 5 forces, porters generic ...
People asked more or less the same question about websites a bit more than a decade ago. I think it's mostly the same. Just as you expect your business partners to have a website so that you don't have to call them for every little piece of information you need, it will soon become the norm to directly access their data.
I think the point has been missed about "Big Data". It doesn't need to be large in volume.
There are historically (from 2001) three tenets of big data
high volume (e.g. Facebook, Google index)
high velocity (e.g. mouse click data being analysed every second for user behaviour triggers)
high variety (e.g. data that has a diversity of data types ...
They aren't synonymous, but big data can be inherited by open data. "Big" is just a quantifiable attribute given to data; meaning there is a large amount of it. "Big" data can also be misrepresented in terms of scale. Your big data could be small to someone else and vice versa. "Open" data is an idea that data should be readily available to the public.
I don't think there is an authorative definition. And there may never be one. Issues such as access, degree of (technical) openness, raw versus cooked data and whether data must be available at source for it to be considered open are some of the contested issues I have already encountered.
I resort to the summary Open Definition as the most useful:
The following resources are mainly about parliament/government open data, but I guess much of it applies to general open data.
Declaration on Parliamentary Openness, by members of international parliamentary monitoring organizations and parliamentary strengthening communities.
Ten Principles for Opening Up Government Information, by the Sunlight Foundation.