In regards to the PVAT, I wanted to let you know that we have made the
language more clear for the non governmental license. Thanks to your
insights, we changed some language and then added other language so
that more clearly presents our intents. Its always been our thinking
to make sure that no one was prohibited from talking about the tool or
any results of the tool ( in any form- which includes blogging). The
only thing the language does is try to protect the intellectual
property while still not making it hard for anyone to talk about their
use of it. Not an easy thing to do! but still i think we have done
Since its release we have had numerous both governmental and non
governmental downloads. -- And an article in this month's Governing
Thanks for helping us shape this license language, as I said before we
are still learning about what works and what doesn't! and your
thoughts are always welcome!
Center for technology in Government, University at Albany
On Jun 10, 6:25 pm, Stephen Buckley <sbuck...@igc.org
> Dear Members of
> [Note: This message cross-posted to "OpenGovInitiative" google-group.]
> I am forwarding a message (see below) from Meghan Cook, the Program
> Manager for the University at Albany's
>Center for Technology in Government TG
> (developer of the
> Public Value Assessment Tool) in which she indicates that they are
> working to loosen a restriction in the PVAT's "Terms of Service" (TOS).
> Ms. Cook is responding to my concern (see further below) that someone
> who downloads PVAT would be restricted, under the TOS, from publicly
> writing about PVAT without first getting CTG's permission. The
> current TOS meaning of "publication" could include posting a message
> about PVAT as part of an Internet discussion (like this one).
> Apparently, this was not their intention, and Ms. Cooks says she will
> inform us when they revise the TOS. As a member of this
> (OpenGovMetrics) email-group, all she has to do is reply to this
> message. (When she does tell us of the TOS change, I'll forward that
> message to others who may be interested (e.g., the general
> OpenGovInitiative group).
> I'm really looking forward to downloading PVAT to see how it works.
> Steve Buckley, moderator
> >>From: Stephen Buckley <sbuck...@igc.org
> >>Subject: Re: Tool for evaluating fed/state/local open government initiatives
> >>Bcc: Meghan Cook <MC...@ctg.albany.edu
> >>I went to the website and read the CTG's conditions for downloading
> >>PVAT (i.e., for "non-governmental" use) and I was just about to
> >>click on "Agree" when I noticed some language where I can not write
> >>anything about the PVAT unless I send my writing to CTG for
> >>approval (and they can take 30 days to respond).
> >>>5. Publication. USER agrees to submit to FOUNDATION (at the
> >>>addresses in section 7 below) any proposed publication, report,
> >>>presentation, or any other work product (collectively
> >>>"Publication") containing any information obtained through use of
> >>>the Work, at least thirty (30) days prior to making the proposed
> >>>Publication available to any third party or the public.
> >>So I'm wondering if writing about PVAT, for example, on this
> >>listserv be seen by CTG as "publication"? It very well could
> >>be. But until CTG says otherwise, I would caution people from
> >>downloading PVAT and then writing about it online without getting
> >>CTG's approval.
> >>On the positive side, I just received an email-reply from the CTG's
> >>Program Manager,
> >>responding to my question about online discussion, and she said
> >>that "we hope to become more a part of the open gov
> >>And so, because I expect the topic of "OpenGov Evaluation" will be
> >>resulting in many threads of conversation, the time seems ripe to
> >>invite people to a "sub-group" discussion (i.e., google-group) that
> >>I have set up called "<http://www.opengovmetrics.com/
>Metrics". People who subscribe to
> >>this "sub-group" can then talk about "Evaluation" without clogging
> >>up this main listserv with message-threads that are not of general interest.
> >>So, by copy of this email, I'm inviting Ms. Cook to reply to the
> >>question of whether CTG considers an online posting to be a
> >>"publication" requiring their prior approval. I'll be sure that
> >>her reply is posted both here AND as a new discussion topic about
> >>"PVAT" athttp://OpenGovMetrics.com.
> >>Anyone interested in OpenGov Evaluation is invited to join the
> >>google-group by sending any message to
> >>BTW: Anyone attending tomorrow's
>OpenGovNYC "unconference" should look