Hi everyone.

Some might remember the 2019 recast of the EU PSI Directive (which is now
also called Open Data Directive) which has a nice round number EU/2019/1024
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/1024/oj). As a directive, it has
been transposed in EU member states and is also transposed/about to be
transposed into the EFTA states.

I was involved in the 2019 recast as a member of the staff of MEP Felix
Reda who wrote the opinion in the IMCO committee of the European Parliament
(the leading committee was ITRE:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0438_EN.html#_section8
)

The Directive has both a general principle on the reuse of content but also
paragraph about how to process requests for re-use.

Germany transposed the PSI-OD-Directive into the "Datennutzungsgesetz" in
2021 but left out the processing part for requests for re-use. I spoke to a
civil servant in the responsible ministry who was involved in the drafting
process and she stated that this was by design. Since the "general
principle" on re-use applies, there would be no use for requests any more.
This idea has been rejected by academic literature which still claims that
the possibility for requests remain embedded in the law

Long story short: After reading the literature, the directive and the law,
I believe that Germany has introduced a law that would allow liberating
content for re-use under license terms compatible with Wikimedia projects.

For a few weeks now, I have put this theory to the test and I have applied
for usage rights for various government documents, pictures etc. This has
been largely successful, but not without hickups. People in the
administration are usually confused by these requests and it takes them a
while to process them.

I would be interested to learn if anyone else in any other EU/EFTA state
has ever used the PSI-OD-Directive (and the transposed law) to force
government entities to release content under a free license.

This was the most concise way of describing this for me. I left out many
details in order to not turn this into a long paper. I am happy to
elaborate on details if requested.

Mathias

(there are some exceptions in the directive. GLAM institutions are not
fully within the scope of all parts of the directive and it is not as
simple to simply go to a museum or a library and tell them to give you a
license for stuff they own. Public broadcasting it also out of scope)
_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to