 So thanks very much, Keith. I think I've just got time for a very quick overview of how the open licensing framework provided by Creative Commons achieves fair with regards to reuse rights. The slides will be made available to you and you'll notice that each slide has a link to relevant information and there's a slide at the end of the presentation which lists good resources as well. So copyright laws grant the monopoly over a work in material form to the owner of it. Creative Commons licenses have filled a need for a public license. That is one that anybody can rely on as a permission to reuse a work. Before CC licenses the only way to get reuse rights was by the exceptions allowed in copyright law or through licenses directly negotiated between a copyright owner and a licensee. So the public license like a Creative Commons license is central to opening up access to research output including the sharing of data associated with these. I've put an open access spectrum representation on the slide because it's really important to distinguish between free access and reusability which starts with permission to share but extends to the right to make derivative works. These permissions to reuse are communicated with a clear machine readable license. So you probably all know a little bit about Creative Commons licenses but as a quick overview there are four license elements that can be combined and that results in six licenses. They're featured on this slide again on a spectrum of allowing more to less reuse of a work. The most open or permissive license is known as the attribution or CC by license and the most restrictive is the attribution non-commercial no derivatives license. You'll see in my slide the free cultural works seal. It's just put there to show you that there are two licenses that qualify for that. But the relevance of that seal was that it was developed for the Wikimedia or for Wikimedia and Wikipedia content and it signals an important delineation between less and more restrictive licenses applied to works in the digital commons. So that just fills out the story with that. In addition to the licenses Creative Commons offers two public domain tools. Now CC0 is the public domain tool for creators to use but there's also a public domain mark which is represented by a copyright symbol with a strike through. And that's something that is used to notify works that are already in the public domain. So that's being used commonly by cultural heritage institutions in their digital collections for example. But I'm just going to focus on CC0 because it can be particularly important to maximize the reuse of data and databases because it otherwise might be unclear whether highly factual data and databases are restricted by copyright or other rights. So CC0 is intended to cover all copyright and database rights so that however data and databases might be restricted under copyright or otherwise those rights are all surrendered. So CC0 is foremost a waiver. It means you waive all of your rights so that you have zero rights left in a work effectively dedicating it to the public domain. It has a legal code beneath it because you need a legal mechanism to relinquish your rights. So when you release content under a CC0 waiver you're explicitly stating that you do not expect attribution. Now there's a little uncertainty around CC0 because Australian moral rights are fairly new but the licenses have been designed as carefully as possible to respect the author's wishes. So the intent and the general understanding is that you do not need to provide attribution. So probably the main point that I would like to make and Keith has already referred to this, do license your data. International rules are too variable to rely on the public domain. CC0 ensures maximum compatibility with other license works and it prevents attribution stacking. For example attributing to many in a project or where not only do you attribute the immediate source of a derivative work but plus plus plus upstream works and there are other ways to acknowledge contribution. The next best thing is probably the CC by the attribution license if you really want attribution to be a legal requirement. The licenses communicate reuse rights through the three layer design built into the license. Now the first layer is the legal code, that's the legal instrument which states the terms and conditions of the license. That second layer is the human readable format. It's the plain language summary that we usually see if we click on the link to a CC license. It's got the relevant icons that clearly indicate the conditions of your licensing and the reuse rights under the license. You might recall the words you are free to under the following terms. In addition to supporting reuse by individuals, the fair principles put specific emphasis on enhancing the ability of machines to automatically find and use the data and that brings us to the third really important layer of the license which is the machine readable translation of the license which attaches itself to digital works or digital copies of works. The translation code which is called rights expression language becomes embedded in the digital source and that helps search engines and other applications identify a work. I might say this can also be achieved by uploading a work to a content sharing platform that supports CC licensing and takes care of the machine readability for you. It's also important to actually mark a work with a license and I'll talk about that shortly. Regarding the robustness of the legal instrument, the Creative Commons licenses have been upheld in every jurisdiction in which litigation concerning them has occurred. But to date there have been no recorded cases of litigation concerning a CC license in Australia which would tend to support the quality of their construction. I just will make the point that CC licenses are irrevocable and so they last for the term of copyright. The licenses are also non-exclusive so it's open to the rights holder to apply another license to the material should the need arise, that's called dual licensing. So for example, if you release material under a CC by non-commercial license but a commercial partner wishes to exploit the material, you are free to enter into a separate license with the commercial partner that permits the commercial use. Now to maximize discoverability by search engines and software systems, when you are licensing a work you should make sure to use our license chooser tool to get the machine readable HTML code. The license chooser also works to mint the license for the purpose of marking the work itself. There are four important things that I'll just point out with regard to the license chooser and that it gives you a framework to select your license to provide attribution and citation. And I'll just talk about each of those things a little bit. With regard to license selection, the license chooser guides you by a series of questions about what reuse you'll allow. So will you allow adaptations of your work to be shared? Will you allow commercial uses of your work? And depending upon the answer that you give to those questions, the relevant license or the appropriate license for you to select will be offered to you and you can see an example there. You do need to remember that if your work is an adaptation of a work licensed under a CC share alike license, so there are two of those, then your derivative work must be made available under the same license as per the share alike condition. With regard to attribution, attribution is a base condition of all of the CC licenses. There is flexibility around attribution requirements though, which you'll read in the license. It says reasonable to means, medium and context. This is really helpful. It enables you to do things like not having attribution within a work if it's not reasonable to do so. You can link out to a separate resource that would provide the required attribution. It's also flexible in that a license or can waive some or all of the attribution requirements. The next really important feature of the licensed chooser is with regards to citation. So being able to locate the work and perhaps also the source works that led to that work. I think that probably answers some of the concerns from data creators about being able to find the original data. There are a few other requirements here. If the work you're licensing is a derivative of another work, then you need to communicate that your work is a derivative and you need to include the source URL of the original work and you also need to describe the modification that you've made. Now when you're modifying materials under the new version 4 CC licenses, you actually have to make a note of any modifications that you make to the materials regardless of whether the modification is significant enough to merit it being a derivative work and you have to provide the URI back to the source. So again, I think that's a good reassurance that has been built in to the license, the version 4 licenses. It might be unfeasible to include attribution. I've already referred to that perhaps within a merged data set in which case include a URI back to the unmodified version. Lastly, the license tool allows you or gives you the option to provide a more permissions URL. So for example, if you license something CC by but you're okay with people not attributing you in certain cases, then this is your chance to specify that in that resource document that you've got. Remember that you can't change the terms of a CC license but you can always grant additional permissions or warranties beyond what the license allows. The other thing is that CC licenses allow for you to incorporate elements of third party materials into your works just by marking these and providing attribution to them. So I referred to the need to mark a work to convey the license as well and on this slide you can see a number of ways in which to do that and there are some useful source documents there like CC's download page that gives you all of the icons, buttons, etc. Regarding content platforms, even if there isn't a license field in a content platform, there's usually a description or some sort of free form field where you can enter information about a work. So that was a very brief overview of the Creative Commons license and the license chooser framework and I guess my key message for today is that reuse is a core component of their data. So do license your data to enable reuse. I think that the Creative Commons licenses provide a simple mechanism to ensure that the users of research have the rights they need to reuse, replicate and apply research outputs and data and to disseminate and communicate research output in order to maximize the impact of work while protecting very importantly the intellectual property and the academic integrity of a work I think with the built-in attribution and citation which creates a clear path to the original data and that's the useful resources link and you'll all be able to get your hands on that when the copy is made available.