Nanopublications LDF server

Matches in Nanopublications for { <https://w3id.org/fair/icc/terms/R1.1-Explanation> ?p ?o ?g. }

• R1.1-Explanation type Explanation assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation label "R1.1 Explanation" assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation isDefinedBy R1.1-Explanation assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation comment "Digital resources and their metadata must always, without exception, include a license that describes under which conditions the resource can be used, even if that is ‘unconditional’. By default, resources cannot be legally used without this clarity. Note also that a license that cannot be found by an agent, is effectively the same as no license at all. Furthermore, the license may be different for a data resource and the metadata that describes it, which has implications for the indexing of metadata v.v. findability. This is a clear public domain statement, an equivalent such as terms of use or computer protocol to digitally facilitate an operation (for instance a smart contract). Thus, the absence of a license does not indicate “open”, but rather creates legal uncertainty that will deter (in fact, in many cases legally prevent) reuse. Note also that the combination of resources with restrictive license conditions may lead to adverse effects, and ultimately preclude the use of the combined resources. In order to facilitate reuse, the license chosen should be as open as possible." assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation seeAlso cc0 assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation seeAlso open-data-should-mean-cc0 assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation explains-principle R1.1 assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation implementation-considerations "A current challenge is that there is currently no well-defined relationship(s) that can be used to distinguish a license that applies to the data being described, versus a license that applies to the metadata record itself, resulting in potential ambiguity in the interpretation of a license referred-to in the metadata record. Current choices are for communities to choose which usage license(s) or licensing requirements to reusable digital resources as well as to their metadata for its own purposes, but also consider broader reuse than originally anticipated or intended." assertion.
• R1.1-Explanation implementation-examples "There are good reasons for choosing a CC0 license for data (http://sulab.org/2016/08/open-data-should-mean-cc0/) and these considerations should be assessed, alongside all other considerations, when a community decides on the license they wish to apply. It is critical, however, that a license is chosen. The community should then ensure that a qualified link to that license is contained in the metadata record." assertion.