Attribution, Licensing and Metadata A. Strollo, F. Haslinger ORFEUS & EPOS Seismology Workshop 2017

In deep view, example of Seismic data Outline Attribution, Licensing, Metadata and Data Policy explained The FAIR data principles The different contexts/levels: institutional, national, international and infrastructural The EPOS data policy Example of the waveform data: NRIs=>EIDA-ORFEUS=>EPOS Outlook ORFEUS is the European Infrastructure for seismic waveform data in EPOS. 1st part Angelo In deep view, example of Seismic data 2nd part Florian overall EPOS view

Attribution, Licensing, Metadata and Data Policies Attribution: is acknowledgement as credit to the copyright holder or author of a work. Attribution is often considered as the most basic requirements in the usage of the works of others, with a long tradition in the scientific community and academia. Attribution can be required by a license (it prevents others from claiming fraudulently to own the data/work). Licensing: A license is an official permission or permit to do, use, or own something. Metadata: is "data that provides information about other data”. Different type of metadata exist: descriptive/technical metadata, structural metadata, administrative metadata. Data Policy: norms regulating management and publication of research data. They range from recommendations to enforcements. There is much variation in their scope and content across countries and across disciplines in single countries.

The FAIR data principles To be Findable: F1. (meta)data are assigned a globally unique and eternally persistent identifier. F2. data are described with rich metadata. F3. (meta)data are registered or indexed in a searchable resource. F4. metadata specify the data identifier. To be Accessible: A1 (meta)data are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized communication protocol. A1.1 the protocol is open, free, and universally implementable. A1.2 the protocol allows for an authentication and authorization procedure, where necessary. A2 metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer available. To be Interoperable: I1. (meta)data use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation. I2. (meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles. I3. (meta)data include qualified references to other (meta)data. To be Re-usable: R1. meta(data) have a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes. R1.1. (meta)data are released with a clear and accessible data usage license. R1.2. (meta)data are associated with their provenance. R1.3. (meta)data meet domain-relevant community standards.

Institutional, National, International levels FAIR data principles : Required for H2020 ’compliance’; also in many countries the foundation of national rules/legislation. Institutional data policy: in most of the institutions nowadays there are guidelines about how to deal with research data. [Sometimes it is not clear whether the same guidelines also apply to monitoring data] National guidelines: most of the countries reacted to the FAIR principles and developed some guidelines at national level. INSPIRE directive (EU): aims to create a common infrastructure for spatial data across Europe. Spatial data are data that have a spatial component. 34 spatial data themes mentioned - Seismology not (yet). This infrastructure will assist sharing of environmental spatial data to the public and other public sector organizations. Inspire mainly prescribes (loosely) how to build (meta)data models. Thematic coordination bodies FDSN, IASPEI, etc: also in these contexts some basic guidelines are provided e. g. fostering “open data”. The world is so complicate…

Infrastructural Context/Level European Research Infrastructure Consortium: EPOS and others EPOS data policy (guidelines): suggests a licensing schema (creative commons) for data & products. EPOS is developing its own Data Model to include all these metadata.

DOI Metadata (Data Cite) Seismic Networks have now a standard (FDSN) procedure to mint DOIs. Metadata (DataCite) includes: Author; Year; Title; Description; and more. To meet the requirements of the INSPIRE Directive and complete the EPOS metadata we mainly miss only a few fields: Contact, eventually an ID e.g. ORCID; License; Keywords/Subjects. But not so complicate, in seismology we started since about two years to mint DOIs for networks.

NRIs > EIDA nodes > ORFEUS > EPOS ORFEUS is the European infrastructure for seismic waveform data in EPOS. EIDA is the ORFEUS federated data center established to securely archive and distribute seismic waveform data and metadata gathered by European research infrastructures (Network operators). Network operators EIDA Node 1 Node N EPOS builds upon data, products and services contributed by national infrastructures

From data suppliers to EPOS through ORFEUS-EIDA NRIs > EIDA nodes > ORFEUS > EPOS From data suppliers to EPOS through ORFEUS-EIDA #1 Formal agreements (Governance) Service provider agreement (ORFEUS-EPOS). Network operator ORFEUS internal governance, MoUs between ORFEUS and the EIDA nodes Supplier letter (the network operator and the EIDA node on behalf of ORFEUS).

From data suppliers to EPOS through ORFEUS-EIDA NRIs > EIDA nodes > ORFEUS > EPOS From data suppliers to EPOS through ORFEUS-EIDA #2 Technical actions Metadata convertor for generic metadata replicated in the EPOS central catalogue (DataCite and part of stationXML). Mapping of domain specific metadata (part of station XML and other standard APIs). Network operator Liaising with the EIDA node to complete the datacite (DOI) metadata including licensing. Review of the domain specific metadata (stationXML).

Most of our data are “open” today Facilitated access to data Why so complicated? Most of our data are “open” today Facilitated access to data Standardization Federation of data and services Large number of clients available Integration Preservation We may need to measure the impact of our data Evolution: the way to access and use data has drastically changed A license applied to the data will definitely help at least to foster proper attribution and protect against misusage of the data (liability). Florian will continue with the enlarged picture

Policy Issues: a diverse and layered landscape legal framework | scope | connections ERIC collaboration ➡ membership➡ OpenAIRE INSPIRE various agreements collaboration ➡ membership➡ FDSN collaboration ➡ national legislation membership➡

Ownership and Intellectual Property: EPOS data policy EPOS has developed a high level data policy, including the following principles: Ownership and Intellectual Property: Data and facilities are owned by the national RIs (that contribute them) EPOS products will be owned by EPOS EPOS respects inherited IPR for all contributions Access and Licensing: Open Access as a general principle (with reasonable restrictions) Data and Products available in a timely manner and preferably free of charge metadata will always be available without restrictions (even for restricted data) licensing of data and products available from EPOS under Creative Commons (preferably CC-BY, CC-BY-NC) authenticated access for EPOS ’central access’ services The EPOS data policy supports the FAIR data management principles: Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable

Intermediate summary / recap FAIR data principles required for H2020 ’compliance’ also in many countries the foundation of national rules / legislation direct implication on metadata & licensing - attribution as a ’positive result’ EPOS data policy (guidelines) suggests a licensing schema (creative commons) for data & products does not prescribe / solve the commercial / non-commercial question EPOS (ICS) may not accept (make discoverable / accessible) data / products w/o license INSPIRE compliance (inspire.ec.europa.eu) INSPIRE sets guiding principles for metadata, also for licensing (incl. attribution) compliance required for INSPIRE member countries and likely for future EC funding INSPIRE themes which may be relevant for us: (Geology, Energy Resources,) Environmental Monitoring Facilities, Natural Risk Zones unclear whether we could ’escape’ (Seismology not explicitly mentioned anywhere) but … the INSPIRE introduction video shows the European Seismic Hazard Map 2013…

EPOS-Seismology: identified data policy issues Ownership and IPR no common understanding of ’who owns what’ and treatment of IPR across Europe ownership and IPR linked to ’legal entities’ (people or institutions) through the processing chain (raw data –> processed data –> high level product) ownership and IPR may change Licensing and Access arbitrary assignment of licenses to different products / services (if at all…) different approaches towards use and re-use of data (in particular for commercial use) ’Open Data’ widely accepted and propagated on national level, but different understanding what this exactly means Careful and conscious licensing policies will enable proper treatment of ownership and IPR

EPOS-Seismology: identified data policy issues A closer look at ’access’ issues The EC and many national governments encourage engagement with the private sector and want to use that engagement as a measure of success / relevance of science potential commercial use cases: insurance industry: earthquake catalogs, hazard products, for portfolio assessment etc. energy sector: waveforms (waveform modeling), strong motion parameters, … for engineering safety social media providers: earthquake information for publicity and targeted services potential issues: for free or against charges? (and if charged, how to enforce?) loss of control over information loss of visibility (-> funding?) increased utilization of science benefits to society ➡ Impact on access control, usage monitoring, licensing Science is competitive: reluctance to ’open’ data & products embargo periods and usage restrictions data (and products) as ’currency’ Science is publicly funded: results shall be free and open for all maximizing access ensures optimal societal benefits reward & recognition through attribution

EPOS-Seismology: data policy issues in context EPOS is governed by European and national rules and legislation Seismology is traditionally and successfully coordinated globally IASPEI / FDSN / COSOI / ISC beyond data formats - coordination of: data policies and dissemination issues identifiers and attribution information through product lifecycle data curation: archiving / versioning / provenance interaction / representation / collaboration with other global bodies GEO / GEOSS | ICSU / WDS data sharing and data management principles data repository guidelines (and certification) Earth Observation data inter-operability OGC (Open Geospatial Consortium) standardization of geodata services new ’Geoscience Domain Working Group’ - could use some seismology input…

Outlook Seismic data providers (Network Operators) will be contacted in the coming months to formalize the link to EPOS thorough ORFEUS and the respective EIDA node. Think about the suitable license (e.g. CC-BY) for your data and start the discussion internally in your institutions (to be prepared when the request will come). Almost all ‘attribution’ issues require proper identification: introduction of persistent referencable identifiers (DOI, PID,…) into the data lifecycle (already at data generation) will almost certainly come. Need to decide / agree on which identifier to use where for what Upcoming EPOS initiative towards standardized and controlled vocabulary for geosciences. Build on existing (partial) standards, expand by integration of existing domain vocabulary (e.g. quakeML), coordinate globally (Australian National Data Service, Earthcube, OGC)