The Open Definition

Short description: Content shareability criterion

The Open content logo

The Open Definition (formerly Open Knowledge Definition)[1] is published by the Open Knowledge Foundation (OKF) to define openness for any type of data, content, or other knowledge. The definition's stated purpose is to "[make] precise the meaning of ‘open’ with respect to knowledge".[2] Although it draws philosophically from both the open-source and free software movements, the Open Definition prioritizes license compatibility over copyleft principles requiring derivative works to be released under a free license. The Open Definition contains requirements for content licenses to be considered open licenses, and the OKF maintains a list of compatible licenses. The definition also requires open access, machine readability, and the use of open formats. The OKF's Open Software Service Definition is derived from the Open Definition.

## Contents

* 1 Background
* 2 Content
* 2.1 Licensing
* 3 Alternatives
* 4 Derivatives
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 Sources
* 8 External links

## Background

The Open Knowledge Foundation (OKF) is a United-Kingdom-based NGO[3] that began work on the definition in 2006.[4] According to the OKF, the Open Definition is "substantially derivative" of Bruce Perens' Open Source Definition and intends to continue Richard Stallman’s "ideals of software freedom".[2] The Open Source Definition, which is the most widely used criteria for determining if a license is open source,[5] is itself is derived from the Debian Free Software Guidelines.[6] Although it is similar to David Wiley's defunct Open Content License (which allows retaining, revising, remixing, reusing, and redistributing open content works), the Open Definition is more specific.[2] It is concerned with freedom of access and reuse, rather than open governance.[6] The definition's stated purpose is to "[make] precise the meaning of ‘open’ with respect to knowledge".[2]

## Content

The definition (version 2.1) contains the following summary: "Knowledge is open if anyone is free to access, use, modify, and share it—subject, at most, to measures that preserve provenance and openness".[6][7] The previous version (1.0) stated that "A piece of content or data is open if anyone is free to use, reuse, and redistribute it — subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute and/or share-alike."[6] The new version makes it clear that using digital rights management (DRM) technology to reduce openness is not allowed.[6]

The definition contains detailed criteria for open knowledge.[2] In terms of open data, the definition covers the four main aspects:[8][9]

* Open license—see below
* Open access—the full content must accessible for free or for no more than a one-time reasonable reproduction fee, "and should be downloadable via the Internet without charge".[9]
* Machine readability—"The work must be provided in a form readily processable by a computer and where the individual elements of the work can be easily accessed and modified."[9]
* The work must use an open format and be viewable and modifiable "with at least one free/libre/open-source software tool".[9]

As such, the requirements of the Open Definition extend beyond open licensing by also requiring the elimination or reduction of technological barriers and pricing.[10][11]

### Licensing

The definition lists nine areas in which the license must be open and seven restrictions that may be placed on the content.[7] The OKF maintains lists of compatible and incompatible licenses that can be applied to knowledge.[2][7] As of 2017[update], it was recommending, in particular, six licenses.[7] It would be possible to draft a bespoke license that met the definition, but this practice would likely lead to compatibility issues in the event of reuse.[12] With the Open Definition, copyleft provisions—requiring reuse of content to be available under a free license—are allowed but not encouraged. The focus is more on license compatibility.[13] Licenses that are noncommercial-only (prohibiting use of content for financial gain) or do not allow derivative works do not meet the Open Definition.[13][1]

## Alternatives

Most of the community involved in open data supports the Open Definition over competing ones, such as that offered by the technology firm Gartner—which only covers use and redistribution.[14] The value that the Open Definition provides as a standard is maintaining license compatibility and preventing the openness of data from being reduced by data sharing and reuse policies.[15]

In contrast to some other definitions of open knowledge, the Open Definition requires freedom of reuse as well as freedom of access.[16] Thus, many open access scientific publications do not meet the Open Definition.[17]

## Derivatives

The OKF's Open Software Service Definition requires that the software service's code be free and open-source software and any non-personal data be available under the Open Definition. Lawyer Andrew Katz criticizes this definition for not doing enough to guarantee transparency and prevent vendor lock-in, which occurs when a company makes it deliberately difficult for users to switch to another service. He suggests that adding requirements for a fully documented and freely available API and bulk data export could mitigate lock-in.[18]

## See also

* Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities
* Budapest Open Access Initiative
* Definition of Free Cultural Works
* UNESCO 2012 Paris OER Declaration

## References

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Greenleaf & Lindsay 2018, p. 494.
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Martin 2022, p. 27.
3. ↑ Stagars 2016, p. 36.
4. ↑ Guy 2016, p. 167.
5. ↑ De Maria et al. 2022, p. 4.
6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Katz 2022, p. 521.
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Hamilton & Saunderson 2017, p. 53.
8. ↑ Stagars 2016, p. 37.
9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 Ciclosi & et al. 2019, The Openness.
10. ↑ Martin 2022, p. 94.
11. ↑ Węcel 2022, p. 9.
12. ↑ Hamilton & Saunderson 2017, pp. 53–54.
13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Lund & Zukerfeld 2020, p. 135.
14. ↑ Thompson 2023, p. 107.
15. ↑ Dalla Corte & van Loenen 2022, p. 243.
16. ↑ Smith & Seward 2020, p. 38.
17. ↑ Langenkamp et al. 2018, p. 110.
18. ↑ Katz 2022, pp. 521, 527–528.

## Sources

* Ciclosi, Francesco; Ceravolo, Paolo; Damiani, Ernesto; De, Ieso Donato (2019). "Assessing Compliance of Open Data in Politics with European Data Protection Regulation". Politics and Technology in the Post-Truth Era. Emerald Publishing Limited. pp. 89–114. ISBN 978-1-78756-984-3.
* Dalla Corte, Lorenzo; van Loenen, Bastiaan (2022). "Open Data and Public Sector Information" (in en). Elgar Encyclopedia of Law and Data Science. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 241–252. ISBN 978-1-83910-459-6.
* De Maria, Carmelo; Díaz Lantada, Andrés; Di Pietro, Licia; Ravizza, Alice; Ahluwalia, Arti (2022). "Open-Source Medical Devices: Concept, Trends, and Challenges Toward Equitable Healthcare Technology". Engineering Open-Source Medical Devices. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79363-0_1. ISBN 978-3-030-79362-3.
* Greenleaf, Graham; Lindsay, David (2018) (in en). Public Rights: Copyright's Public Domains. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-13406-5.
* Guy, Marieke (2016). "The Open Education Working Group: Bringing People, Projects and Data Together". Open Data for Education. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 9500. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 166–187. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30493-9_9. ISBN 978-3-319-30492-2.
* Hamilton, Gill; Saunderson, Fred (2017) (in en). Open Licensing for Cultural Heritage. Facet Publishing. ISBN 978-1-78330-185-0.
* Katz, Andrew (2022). "Everything Open". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University Press. pp. 512–538. ISBN 978-0-19-260687-7. https://academic.oup.com/book/44727/chapter/378969640.
* Langenkamp, Karin; Rödel, Bodo; Taufenbach, Kerstin; Weiland, Meike (2018). "Open Access in Vocational Education and Training Research". Publications (MDPI AG) 6 (3): 29. doi:10.3390/publications6030029. ISSN 2304-6775.
* Lund, Arwid; Zukerfeld, Mariano (2020) (in en). Corporate Capitalism's Use of Openness: Profit for Free?. Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-030-28219-6.
* Martin, Victoria (2022) (in en). The Complete Guide to Open Scholarship. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 979-8-216-06415-2.
* Smith, Matthew L.; Seward, Ruhiya Kristine (2020). "Updating Open Development: Open Practices in Inclusive Development". Making Open Development Inclusive. The MIT Press. doi:10.7551/mitpress/11635.003.0006. ISBN 978-0-262-35882-8. https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-edited-volume/4873/chapter/618126/Updating-Open-Development-Open-Practices-in.
* Stagars, Manuel (2016) (in en). Open Data in Southeast Asia: Towards Economic Prosperity, Government Transparency, and Citizen Participation in the ASEAN. Springer. ISBN 978-3-319-32170-7.
* Thompson, John K. (2023) (in en). Data for All. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-1-63343-877-4.
* Węcel, Krzysztof (2022) (in en). Big, Open and Linked Data: Effects and Value for the Economy. Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-031-07147-8.

## External links

* No URL found. Please specify a URL here or add one to Wikidata.

* v
* t
* e

Free-culture and open-source movements

Concepts and
practices|

| Key concepts|

* Commons-based peer production
* Crowdsourcing
* Gratis versus libre
* Open collaboration
* Openness
* Participatory culture
* Sharism

| Social peer-to-peer processes|

* Peer-to-peer banking
* Peer-to-peer carsharing
* Peer-to-peer lending
* Peer-to-peer ridesharing

|

Research and science|

* Citizen science
* Open science
* Access
* Notebook science
* Research
* Science data
* Plan S

Data, information,
and knowledge|

* Free content
* Knowledge commons
* Open communication
* Open knowledge
* Content
* Data

Communication
and learning|

| Media|

* Collaborative writing
* Democratic media
* Open publishing
* Participatory media
* Peer review

|

Education|

* Open education
* Educational resources
* University
* Admissions
* Open-door academic policy

Journalism|

* Citizen media
* Citizen journalism and Wiki journalism
* Open-source journalism

Economy, production,
and development|

| Products|

* Free and open-source software - FOSS
* Free/Libre software
* Open-source software
* Open-design movement
* Robotics
* Open gaming
* Open-source architecture
* Open-source hardware

|

Economic principles|

* Gift economy
* Open innovation
* Open patent
* Open standard
* Sharing economy

Politics and governance|

* Open government
* Open-source governance

Organizations|

* Creative Commons
* Free Software Foundation
* Open Architecture Network
* Openmod initiative
* Open Knowledge International
* Open Rights Group
* Open Source Initiative
* Open Web Foundation
* P2P Foundation
* Pirate Party
* PLOS
* SPARC

Activists|

* Tim Berners-Lee
* Alexandra Elbakyan
* Cody Wilson
* Lawrence Lessig
* Peter Murray-Rust
* Douglas Rushkoff
* Richard Stallman
* Peter Suber
* Peter Sunde
* Aaron Swartz
* Matthew H. Todd
* John Wilbanks

Projects and
movements|

* DIYbio
* Free-culture movement
* Free software movement
* Open science movement
* Open Source Ecology
* Open-source software movement
* OpenCores
* OpenWetWare
* Sci-Hub

| Tools|

* Licenses
* Creative Commons
* GPL
* Definition Docs
* Free Cultural Works
* Free Software
* Open
* Open Source
* Open Data Indices
* Open educational resources
* Open music model
* Open Web movement

|

ATM CRAD:Open 2152 DOD Thai

0.00

(0 votes)

Original source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The Open Definition. Read more

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=The_Open_Definition&oldid=4230475"
*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template