Submitted by Heather1 Morrison on Wed, 02/15/2017 - 21:47
It is great to see the release of comments on the consultation. However, the open license is not appropriate for comments submitted to consultations. I recommend fair dealing instead, and data mining and analysis should form part of fair dealing (this is basically just automated reading and processing). Here is why: sometimes I take the time to prepare detailed comments in response to such consultations, although not this time. This is my work; it goes on my CV, under my name. If the work has commercial value, for example if someday I wish to create a collection of my work to sell, the economic rights are mine, and should not be granted to any downstream user. I am a professor, but I can see how others (journalists, freelance writers, etc.) might have the same perspective. Organizations also sometimes prepare in-depth responses to government consultations. These should be available to the public, and available for data mining and analysis, but not available for modification or downstream sales unless the contributor wishes to grant such rights. Thank you for having the consultation and making the results available. The open license was a good first guess for what to do with this information, I do not mean to critique the decision, rather to suggest that this kind of data be limited to fair use in future. This would be helpful to encourage in-depth, well thought out and well written submissions. Another small point: I hope you have permission to include the names and e-mail addresses of the individuals listed in the e-mail contribution spreadsheet. My name is Heather Morrison, by the way, I had to add a 1 because apparently I am a registered user.