 Thomas Margody. He is a senior researcher at the University of Amsterdam at the Institute for Informational He is an expert in copyright law and the internet, particularly with an international point of view. So he is going to talk about the licenses that apply in the study. I would also like to see him have a summary of the study. Rwy'n rwy'n gweld bod yn gweld yn ystod yng ngynyddol yn 150 pethau yng ngynyddol yn ysgrifennol yn ystod ar y llef. Mae hynny'n ddiddordeb o'r ddweud. Rwy'n ddiddordeb o gymryd hynny. ydych chi'n gweithio ar y dyfodol, y 10-page is paper is something that I really warmly recommend you to pick up and to read. We tried to make it to make it as clear and understandable to known lawyers as we could. That's of course a hard task since we are lawyers so you know to us it's clear and understandable. Nils that just left has put a lot of work in that and also in the analysis as well in the one page two pages that is basically a summary of the recommendation this is also available at the desk outside and is also something that you should take a look at if you're interested in this field as you know sitting here at 9am you might suggest that you are. If you have specific question on that so the second part of this legal session we have two panels where they hold ideas to have an interactive debate so that would be the perfect time for you to ask questions if there is any part that is not clear. But yes let's move to licences. So as Professor Wiebe has said in a very effective way we are in a field where the legal dimension can be extremely complex. We have a bunch of laws at different levels that sometimes unfortunately are contradictory. It's not always clear what we can do and what we cannot do. Reasons are you know of course there are different interests behind the legislative process so every result is to some extent a compromise. The one that we are facing in these days today in particular the sui gener is database right is a rather bad compromise everybody agrees. But still that's the law that is enforced and so we have to cope with it. As Andreas pointed out there are exceptions that can prove extremely effective to to to protect a specific interest in a given case. So for example the proud cop exception or the scientific exception. But unfortunately these exceptions have been drafted in a way that it's very hard to rely on them on a general basis especially for a study for a project as open air plus that seems at representing the European open access infrastructure. Reasons are many because they are very narrowly drafted. The wording is not clear. The concepts are not are not by themselves clear and in their application international law they they are not clear and especially because exceptions both for copyright and for the sui gener database right are not mandatory. It means that each member state can decide which one to implement international law and the end of the day that's what really matters what has been implemented international law. So in theory we are in a in a European copyright system where 28 different countries can implement on the basis of copyright and and sui gener is 15 different exceptions and limitation or combination thereof. So that gives you like a matrix that is quite complex and you you should not forget about it but use it as an extreme ratio. If you don't have anything else look at that but that's not enough for for a study as open air plus. So we look at a different tool that in our opinion and not only in our opinion it's it's the standard tool to to face this type of problems. It's at our disposal nowadays which is contracts the construction is very clever on the one side you have legislation that grants to authors and to right holders of the database right a lot of rights great then we use this power to license those rights in a way that we find this should be the standard approach especially in the field of scientific knowledge a field where the knowledge in many instances is produced thanks to public funding this knowledge should be freely available since the legislation does not offer by itself this feature we can combine the power that the legislation directive laws etc gives to authors or better to right holders suggest or recommend them to apply to these you know big power that they have specific contracts these corporate licenses that we are about to look and in this way we are able to create this system of of shared knowledge where people can legally have access and reuse this knowledge which is basically what we want to do and contracts are the tool that we have identified for this purpose but you know the entire open access movement has is based on this the entire free open source software movement is based on on the use of this type of contracts to achieve something that currently the legislation wouldn't wouldn't allow so our i don't enter any recommendations that will be outlined by lucigibo at at the end but what we conclude is that everybody should use one specific license and we found that the creative commons public license version four it's the license that open air plus should use both inbound and outbound and lucig probably talks more about the importance of this aspect um the creative commons is a suit of licenses because we are talking about one specific license the creative commons public license but even that one is a suit because it comes in let's say different flavors or better in different license elements we have attribution share or life non-commercial non-derivatives we conclude that non-commercial and non-derivatives should not be used this creates unnecessary burdens for the circulation of data attribution is the one that we recommend share alike that is the possibility to create derivative words only under the obligation that the derivative work is licensed under the same license or an equivalent one it's something that can be used or not so we believe that in the case of data it's not really necessary so in our opinion attribution should be the best option but also the share alike option is is is acceptable and it's fit for the purpose i would enter a little bit into the into well why we chose this specific license as the one that we think it's it's the the model that everybody should use we will see that in the study especially not maybe now in this presentation but in the study we have analyzed other licenses that are available and here i briefly explain you why we think that creative commons public license version four is what you should choose well as almost any like any open license that is any license that aims to achieve a open access or pre opens or software model if you apply the same rationale to another field grants the the right to reproduce and redistribute that are the two main rights within which you can include the right to make available to communicate to the public to make available to the public online etc etc etc so everything that copyright scope includes in verbatim or modi so in the original form or in modified versions so you can also modify the the the work that you obtain and and and redistribute it however creative commons version four the cpl version four includes this strange european invention the sweet generous database right it's a uh professor vibe gave a short description in before into the scope of the license this is very important there are a lot of licenses that do not do that that do not explicitly include the sweet generous database right into the scope of the license um this means that this right is not licensed this means that if you have uh uh let's say a repository and this repository is uh that there has been a substantial investment so it's protected by the sweet generous right and this repository is licensed under the same a creative commons 3.0 ported you cannot datamine it that would be a violation of the right holder sweet generous right because as we see later version three important imported does not include the sweet generous right in the scope of the license uh other licenses that we have identified although would qualify as open access in the field of copyright like as understood before the sweet generous database right after the enactment of this right in europe uh they cannot uh truly be considered open access because they do not include in the scope explicitly the sweet generous database right if this is not included in the license this remains into the dominion of the right holder is not licensed you don't have the permission to use it if you do you're infringing his uh not copyright but sweet generous database right you don't want to do that version four of creative commons includes explicitly this is a very important point uh the sweet generous database right in the scope um since it is included in the scope of the license it follows the license elements the license elements are basically the attribution and share a like obligations they're also named commercially known derivatives but we already said that we don't really think these are elements that we should uh uh consider it means that if a database is only protected by the sweet generous database right you can extract substantial amounts of this data and you are under the obligation to attribute the paternity of this database in the forms indicated by the attribution clause uh if there is a share a like uh um a license element clause on that database then you can of course redistribute that product under your obligation to use the same license is something that is quite common in many other fields like pre-software so we have this double uh possibility um it does not export the sweet generous database right in countries where it doesn't exist is another very important aspect the sweet generous database right is a european invention it doesn't exist anywhere else in the world so i think we made a survey south korea it could be recognized by bilateral agreements with the european commission and we think that only south korea so far has done that and probably nobody else is gonna do that so if you are dealing for example with a us database or you know with any database located outside the the european union which is not covered by the sweet generous database right you want to make sure that you're not for you know a bad drafting of the license exporting contractually this right this might be a bit technical so i don't want to enter into the detail of that if you are interested we can you know you can ask it but you know rest assured that it has been drafted in a way that also this potential uh um uh danger has been avoided with this well-known and interoperable uh it's not the only license out there but the fact that creative commons licenses are known and widely used increases interoperability which is another very important aspect and they're also almost ready uh creative commons version four right now is not a public available uh the current version is version three uh version four should be ready should have been ready almost a year ago there has been a lot of drafting and redrafting to to make them uh look very nice we'll see briefly what this all this drafting has brought to uh and but they should be ready really literally weeks in right to not November it's a bit we had we have had a lot of of dates so it's but really they're almost ready they're we're rereading the final drafts so they should be almost there um so what should you do until if you cannot really wait you cannot use the cc 4.0 but you need to apply now you know right now you're you're not listening to me and you are deciding the license to apply to your database uh there is a creative commons version three so the current version this is an option but you have to consider two main things this version is still uh um uh it comes still in an unported version so let's say a general version if you go on the online chooser you say no jurisdiction or or or unported or you can choose the version ported to uh Lithuania, Belgium, Netherlands, US, you pick the country this is very important because in the unported version the sui gener's database right is not mentioned it means that if you apply a creative commons version three to your database and this version three is the unported one you're not licensing the database right so you're not allowing the permission to datamin your database if you're dataminning a database under this version three you're infringing the database right if you choose a version three ported to a european union country so for example the dutch version the german version uh the spanish version there is a mention of the sui gener's database right but it's a waiver it's not included in the scope of the license but the sui gener's is waived it means that the right holder uh relinquishes that right and says i will never enforce it this is an option but it means that um like the clause is like attribution or share or like do not apply to the sui gener's you're not licensing it you're saying you're not going to enforce it so if you're interested in receiving attribution for the use of your database uh creative commons version three ported to a european jurisdiction will not grant you this possibility a licensee so somebody who uses your database is not bound to recognize you attribution for the database part we're not talking about copyright right now um so you can use them yes but it needs to be the version three ported to a european union country and you have to keep in mind that the sui gener is right it's not licensed it's waived is another major uh difference uh well briefly what are the other major differences between three and four well the three is ready the four as we have seen is going to be ready in weeks uh the three uh ported to a european jurisdiction uh waives the sui gener is database right this acronym means that the license for licenses it so in in the hypothetic in the hypothesis where there is a repository and this is only protected by um uh a sui gener is database right if these repositories under a creative commons version three ported to european union you can use it but you're not obliged to recognize attribution if you are the who makes it available keep in mind that that's fine but nobody that uses this database will will be obliged to give you any attribution so if for you attribution is a very important aspect version three is not able to to offer this possibility to you um well there are another few differences that maybe a more technical i mentioned them but you know again if you're interested we can discuss them further if not so i just mentioned them three is a general close of reservation for dozens so the you know possible scope of protection is bigger another aspect that might it's cross border between purely technical and and general interest is the fact that as we have seen this tree version there is the unported version and then the version ported to every single country and it may make this can create important consequences as the fact that's what we just saw about the sui gener is database right uh for many different reasons including the possible confusion that this can can can cause uh version four will not be uh imported imported uh dutch lituanian finished version it will come in uh let's say only one flavored international one so it has been rewritten in a way that is a jurisdiction agnostic that it's based as much as possible on common international principles of copyright law to the extent that this is possible so there will be only one version the international one however there will be translations which is a completely different thing than creating adapted adapted versions or ported versions um so you will still find the version in your own language but this will be a translation of this international version what does this mean it means that it will still have the the regular commons deed representation so this is of the current version three and this is basically what you obtain when you choose the creative commons license uh online you get what you obtain it's first of all a common deed that is a summary uh humanly understandable um like we lawyers we're not human i don't never really agree with this vision um that basically very directly tells you what you can do and under which conditions version four will look look and feel my change colors my change but we'll still look in terms of your free under the following condition categories to do almost it's going to look almost the same so from a user perspective they're not going to be big changes from how you know you relate to the license how you choose it how you apply it etc um what will change is the legal code so if uh here you go on the first line uh legal code you go to the to the actual contract to the document that has a legal value the one that you have to read if you want to make sure uh what are your your obligations and this will change this current one is a tribute is version three and this one is version four it's just you know um well first of all to show you that they exist and almost ready and but also to tell you that the structure if you're interested in more the detail and the legal part the structure of the license has changed there is a preamble consideration for the licencer definitions have changed so there are a lot of technical changes that under a legal point of view are interesting but as users not technical users uh you shouldn't be uh too much concerned the main difference that you have to keep in mind is the three generous thing uh what you won't see is the ported version this is the the Dutch ported version this one won't exist anymore there will be a translation but not a ported version um and that's basically it uh a first mention to the fact that yes there are other licenses but for the standardisation and interoperability issues that we we just briefly detail we we think that uh pretty common version four is the one license that you should go for there is also the cc zero that many times is is mentioned and especially in the psi sector public sector information this is an option but the cc zero again is a waiver you're relinquishing every right on that database or or or you know material it means that for example if you're interested in attribution recognition cc zero won't allow this um the reason why cc zero might be more suitable for the psi is that your psi normally then you know again it's a very great categorisation but they are not scientific data or there is not a scientific department behind it that is interested in getting some sort of scientific recognition many times psi are i don't know the the municipality that based on the basis of its institutional activity collects the the the boundaries of the rights into the town but there is not many times there is no need for a recognition of of of paternity in that so cc zero might be an option for scientific databases however we think that usually what we saw attribution especially it's it's very it's considered a very important aspect so with cc zero you won't you won't get it and yeah basically these are our conclusions use cc 4.0 as soon as it is ready well thank you for the attention if there are questions now or the session later we have two big fans thank you very much