Ask HN: Is there a license like GPL for data? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is there a license like GPL for data?

7 pointssmallegan7 comments

I am interested in the creation of some publicly created and publicly available datasets. Can anyone tell me if there is a license out there already in existence that would be to data as the GPL is to software? Thanks in advance!

View on HN

When you say GPL, do you mean copy left? You could probably use CC-BY-SA for that, but I'd recommend reading this article by John Wilbanks at Science Commons

http://scienceblogs.com/commonknowledge/2010/06/open_data_an...

as well as the Panton Principles

http://pantonprinciples.org/

In general, like with certain software tools and libraries a copy left license might not be the best choice, which is part of where John comes from.

Before getting to the issue of licensing, at least if you are in the US, you probably should consider whether or not you are doing something copyrightable. If not, the licensing issue doesn't even arise.

Facts are not copyrightable, but the arrangement or presentation can be. The major case law on this is Feist vs. Rural Telephone. Wikipedia has a good writeup at the moment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Tel....

Data doesn't have the same protection as forms of expression do.

Copyright doesn't apply in the same way, educate yourself a bit before trying too hard; you may find out you're not going to be able to do what you want to do:

http://www.pddoc.com/copyright/compilation.htm

http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html

http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/obtaining.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law#Com...

I don't know if it's possible to copyright data (if I understand your definition of data correctly), but it should not be, at least, not in the US. A quick skim of the wikipedia article on US copyright law shows that the scope of copyright is meant only to cover the arts and literary and scientific writing.

Obviously we know that (unfortunately) that includes software, but data would be a stretch.

Also here: http://sciencecommons.org/old/databases/#dbcopyright The important quote is: "...whether the data itself is copyrightable, depends on what it is. To the extent it consists of factual information, it will not be copyrightable."

If it's not copyrighted, you don't need the GPL or anything similar.

"Obviously we know that (unfortunately) that includes software, but data would be a stretch"

How is it unfortunate that copyright covers software? Without copyright there would be no such thing as Free Software as it would be impossible to require people to distribute source with binaries or to distribute their changes.

Closed source could survive somewhat in a world without copyright on software since it doesn't come with source in the first place and can at least attempt to use DRM or other technological means to stop people from redistributing.

What about the GNU Free Documentation License: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html

IANAL, but this seems to be at least close to what you are looking for. I do not know exactly what constitutes the difference between a "document" and a "data set" (outside of the physical format"), but I would think that the license could apply to any data set printed on paper, so it could also apply to one in digital format.

A quick google found this: http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1-0/ YMMV

Reply on news.ycombinator.com