I believe the website and the report are different - the report itself, on page three, states the following:
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 8 July 2016 at 15:02, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 8 July 2016 at 01:51, とある白い猫 to.aru.shiroi.neko@gmail.com wrote:
It can be argued that the current copyright obfuscates the general
public's
access to the report.
How so?
I do feel that any single email from us would be promptly ignored as
there
probably is a large volume of emails. It may be prudent to either start a petition (for the Parliament) or ask a few MPs to raise the copyright
issue
in the Parliament.
Petitioning for what? The report is already under the CC-by compatible Open Government Licence 3.0
First of, the websites terms and conditions do not explicitly release the works under a free license.[1]
No, the report's licence is on the pages of the report itself.
Moreover it mentions BSkyB, BBC and ITN as copyright holders of some of
the
documents. Any migration to Wikisource must filter out such content.
Are your referring to inclusions in the report, or to other content on the inquiry website?
Lastly there are a number of now declassified documents that provide
vital
evidence to reinforce the reports findings, these too need to be freely licensed.
AIUI, they are (albeit with understandable redactions).
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk