That’s exactly right. We take, for example, the data has its origin URL. You use that as the attribution, and that will completely state the license quite well.

Until we have a truly international Creative Commons license, I don’t think it’s easier or any more comfortable than a local license with a transition clause. That was back then. I’m not sure if we do the whole exercise now, wouldn’t we just choose CC 4. Maybe we would, but ...

At that time, there is no Chinese version of Creative Commons 4.0. It was not translated until 2016, if I am not mistaken. It wasn’t an option. While we could of course use CC BY 3.0 Taiwan, but that doesn’t really work.

As why do we not just choose CC 4.0? Was that the question?

At the time, GPL has a very large number of users, and Artistic License is only used by Perl or a few other software packages. He wanted to make sure that it’s considered part of the larger free software movement, so this device is promoted to us.

Larry Wall designed it, Artistic License specifically, to make people using the GNU Public License happy, because they can, if they want, transition from Artistic License to the GPL.

There are a few things. The first is that this one-way transition clause is actually very familiar to us, especially to me, because the first open-source license that I encounter was the Artistic License as used in the Perl community.

It was then discussed after quite a few discussion that existing civil code actually covers this already. It really doesn’t matter whether it’s part of the license or not, so that was taken out. I think that’s the two substantial debates that we have.

There were some other issues as well. There was about whether usage of this data or misuse can cause the damage in reputation for the providing agency, and whether the user of this data should provide the warranty or compensate for any damages.

After some debate, it was deleted from the community version, because it’s not part of any of the three initial design goals. It’s more of a request, because it wouldn’t then fit the open definition definitions, so they took it out.

There was quite a few discussions around this clause, because there’s clearly a need by the providing agency, but it’s actually not so clear that it actually fits open definition. I may want to make something that really requires a very high barrier of entry, and I don’t want to ...

That’s actually one of the very common clauses before open data, when we only had the freedom of information, Public Information Publishing Act, is that if you make derived works, let us know somehow, as part of the terms of use.

For example, there was a use case where the providing agency, as they often did, requested a copy of any derived work from the data - be it an application or whatever, as a tracking mechanism, if you will.

Yeah, certainly. During the community discussion, there is actually a lot of issues raised in the Hackpad discussion.

Now, even the National Palace Museum publishes under this license, so we don’t have a proliferation or ambiguity of licenses as a result of this.

When they need to choose one, they are now faced to either invent their own bespoke license and then submitting to meet the open definition, or they can just take the one that, by definition, fits the open definition. Most choose the latter.

It took about eight months to arrive at a national version, which is mostly the same as the initial community draft. It has a disclaimer, I think, but I don’t think there’s any substantial differences. Once that happens, now we have something that we can refer to when saying that ...

One of the g0v movement strategies is that most of our products that are intending to be official at some day, are CC0. The government doesn’t really need to ask our copyright if they somehow make it the official version. That’s pretty much it.

The third goal is for the government, at the time, to easily adopt it. Their draft version, as well as all the community revisions -- which we all participated in -- are relinquished under the Creative Commons Zero license.

That’s the second goal, is that internationally, we don’t need additional interpretation for it to actually work.

Second goal is that technically, it needs to be interoperable internationally. The idea is to list open definition as the requirement of open data for government-published open data, and then design this license to comply with the open definition. This does not mean that we asked Open Knowledge right away ...

The first is a clear interpretation of legal framework that this is a license. Part of the framework of the open data platform is to clearly delineate the license versus the term of use. Term of use describe how people can use the Open Data Platform in general, but each ...

The first, according to their slides -- I’m reading off their slides now.

The Open Government Data License was the general idea of the community. They are acutely aware of license issues and potential solutions. Lucien and Florence, who proposed the license, both worked on the Creative Commons license, both the third version, which had to be localized to Taiwan, and also the ...

So the problen was not so much license proliferation, but the general ambiguity of what exactly open data is in our legal structure. It’s not open license proliferation, but rather a dilution of the term open data. The terms of use were unsublicensable, and you could not create derived works. ...

There are, of course, other government, like city governments, like the Kaohsiung City government that said, "OK, you can use our data according to the terms of use of the national Open Data Platform," but there really wasn’t the clear legal interpretation of what exactly this means, because it’s not, ...

Also, many, especially regional city governments, see it just as one of the data portals where they post their index, but they all have their own licenses. For example, Taipei City, New Taipei City, all have their own licenses.

The situation back then, at the end of 2014, was that there is not, strictly speaking, a government license for the Open Data Platform ’data.gov.tw’, but only terms of use. It’s not very clearly a license.

The community actually created the Taiwan Open Government Data License at a hackathon, that’s the 11th hackathon of the g0v movement. It was proposed by Lucien and Florence, as you can see here in the Hackpad.

Sure, certainly. In the application, there is a link to a Hackpad, which is a shared document, which is all in Chinese. It provides some key dates, if you are interested.

Tell me about your research.

That’s great.

Hello. This is Audrey. Can you hear me?

It was a pleasure. Thank you.

A little bit.

That’s right.

It’s in a nearby time zone, we could meeting VR.

Exactly.

All the others, I think, would require a lot of adaptation of your program to fit the Minister of Education’s K-12 or the Ministry of Science and Technology’s AI-based platform, in which AVR is still important but more like a facilitating tool.

If you are looking for alignment with KPI, I would highly encourage you to compare your KPIs in other governments with the KPI that’s outlined in this special budget item. That’s the most relevant part.

I would encourage you to read the KPIs there because it was done in a bottom-up fashion. Also, they consulted the existing AVR companies. There’s a lot of people doing special effects and things like that, around that area. They talked with them and so everybody felt that it’s reasonable ...

The Kaohsiung city and the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The MOEA.

Well just today, that plan got the budget from the parliament.

Feel free to use the same model and communicate either with regional leadership or with other ministries.

Exactly. It is, actually, very challenging to reclassify Bitcoin into any of those terms because when the terms were made, there was no Bitcoin, so it doesn’t really clearly fit into any of those slots for the central bank. That was that.

For example, there was a Bitcoin company here and talking about how they want taxation regulations to be changed to be considered a virtual currency instead of a virtual good, which was repeatedly taxed and so on. Then, that company used its transcript and forwarded it to the Minister of ...

Feel free to use the transcript’s URL, which I relinquish all copyrights. Go ahead and use it in however way you want. Maybe we can do a short summary as a summary statement or whatever. I think that’s the extent that I can help.