 Thank you for attending today's webinar, which will be about the FAQ, research data FAQ, which you'll find on the Osgoal website. As you'll be aware, Anne was involved in the creation of that FAQ, and we've chosen to put it on the Osgoal site rather than the Anne site. I just thought I'd do a short introduction about the FAQs, why we did them, how we did them, what comes next. What I would like is any questions from you about those FAQs or indeed about other questions, indeed any other questions that you might like to have included with them. So to talk a little bit about why we did the FAQ, I suspect that the answer to that is fairly self-obvious. There's obviously a huge need to clarify issues around data licensing, why one might license how you might go about it, and to put that into terms which we hope can be pretty readily understood. In fact, we would really appreciate your feedback about that, and if there are any issues there that you don't find as clearly explained as you might, then we'd really like to hear about that. There's not a lot of information readily available about data licensing, and so we were hoping to fill a hole relating to that. And there's not a huge amount of support at this stage at the institutional level, and this is despite the very best attempts of research data support staff. But it's an area which is growing in importance and I think is coming to people's attention. And we certainly could do with much more expertise around the place, so hence the FAQ. How we did the FAQ? Well, we asked Anne's partners about what sorts of questions they had. We put out a short survey form in December, and our thanks to anybody who responded. We then put the questions together. We perhaps in some cases combined them because they would you put the questions being asked. We put them into what we hope is a sense of order and grouping, and we set about answering them. Baden answered most of them. I answered some of them. So together it was an Anne's or scroll effort. You'll notice if you when you go to the FAQ that there's a form there for the input of further queries. It's not terribly heavily used. And in fact we have got one new question which we'll be putting into the FAQ pretty shortly. And I'll actually deal with that one a little bit later. Anne's is trying to be pretty proactive in the area of data licensing to publicise the issues around it. We have already been in touch with both call and arms call with Council Australian University librarians arms the Australian Research Management Society. Both of the call is an official body it works within the university's arms is made up of members of who most of whom work in research offices, not just in universities but in all sorts of different groups such as organizations and hospitals and so on around the country. Both of these groups are very active in terms of being having close relations with the institutions lead office and both are involved very often in developing policy around these things. So we said we've answers been in touch with both call and arms. We haven't yet been in touch with universities Australia we're currently working on that and I suspect that that will happen in the next month. We are talking to universities Australia not just about data licensing but also around issues of copyright in data. One of the reasons we're talking to universities Australia about copyright is that there is a lot of confusion. There is a lot of variation between the different universities about the actual ownership of copyright in data. In some universities the copyright and data is owned by the researcher in some it's owned by the institution. And in some their policy statements really don't make it clear who might own the copyright and data. This makes it really difficult for researchers because in many cases they don't know who owns the copyright and find it hard to find out. And so when people are assigning licenses we need to make sure that the person who actually owns the copyright is the person who assigns the license. Unless the university of course has a very straightforward policy about what sort of license should be applied under certain conditions. But to the best of my knowledge now university in Australia has got that right at the moment. The Osgoal FAQ is divided into four sections licensing in general, creative commons in particular because the Osgoal framework uses creative commons as the basis for most of its license. There's a section of other licenses which is actually quite small because for the most part people aren't using a lot of other licenses except that they do need them for things like software. So there are some questions there about that. And the last section there is actually about copyright. When does copyright subsist in data? What happens if it doesn't subsist in data? That kind of thing. Now I noticed that no questions have come in for me, which is a pity because I really was hoping to have some questions of yours to deal with at this point. But if there are, I thought I might just run through some of the issues which have come to my attention. There are some questions which just seem to come up time and time and time again and perhaps run through those. The first one of those is about applying a license to data, even if copyright doesn't exist in the data. And we are frequently asked this question. And the answer to the question is that applying a license is a good thing to do even if copyright doesn't exist because whether or not that copyright does exist can only really be determined by a court of law. So nobody in your institution can tell you definitively whether copyright exists in a particular set of data. Applying a license is a very good idea. There's no harm to be, no harm will happen if there is in fact no copyright in the data. But it certainly lets anybody know what the researcher wants to do with it if a license is applied. I mentioned earlier that we have a new question which we want to include in the FAQs. That is about the use of non-commercial license, CC licenses. Somebody put it to me actually the other day that if a non-commercial license is placed on a data set, then that data set may not be used by somebody who is getting funding from a commercial supplier, from a commercial source, perhaps a pharmaceutical company or an agricultural company or something like that. People who apply a non-commercial license need to be aware that it really does create possible problems for people. It's quite understandable that people don't want their data being used perhaps for commercial purposes that they wouldn't then get any gain from. But I think it might be another thing if they realise that it means their data cannot be used by people who are getting any funding from industry, even where the topic of the research may not be of particular commercial value to the funder. So we'll be getting an answer to that question up on the website sometime soon. I mentioned earlier about copyright and data and whether or not copyright actually exists in data. There is some confusion still. It hasn't been made absolutely clear legally whether or not all data is subject to copyright or whether some is or which might be and which might not be. And in fact Anne's put in a submission to the recent Australian Law Review, Australian Copyright Law Review Committee about this seeking clarification about that. So if there are any developments on that field, we will keep the FAQ updated. Legal things being what they are. We don't expect any developments very soon. There's a question there about who actually has a right to apply a licence to the data. And I talked about that a little bit earlier also that basically the copyright holder should be the person who is applying the licence. And where there is confusion particularly within universities about who the copyright holder might be, this can sometimes lead to a situation where the licence is being applied by somebody who actually doesn't have the right to be applied to apply it. Many researchers are employed in organisations which are run by the government CSIRO for example. And in those situations copyright tends to be held by the organisation. Universities I think are a bit different in that in terms of scholarly works most universities do handle copyright. Two researchers, the difficulty there becomes one that the universities tend to define scholarly works but they tend not to talk about data in the context of scholarly works. And so this is where it becomes very ambiguous as to whether or not copyright and data is held either by the researcher or by the institution. I actually think that's all I wanted to say today. Okay, thank you very much indeed. I think we'll call it a day.