The terms of use for the data are such that I won't be developing applications which use Ottawa's open data and here's why (a solution is at the bottom):

1) I could follow the terms of use and still get sued. "The City cannot make any promise that the datasets are free and clear of any possible third party copyright, moral rights, or other claim." Shouldn't the city know where its data comes from and have some idea about the copyright status of the data?

2) I have to agree not to sue the city and at the same time agree that they can sue me. As a student, I can't afford such a liability.

3) The city could require me to remove any mention of where I got the data. In my opinion, limiting speech is orthogonal to open.

4) I could get cut off from city data -- even data I already have in my possession. "The City may, in its sole discretion, cancel or suspend your access to the datasets without notice and for any reason..." causing me to "..no longer be authorized to use or reproduce these datasets." How can I develop any meaningful software application when I am constantly under fear that at any time I could be told to stop. Also, what happens to the modifications I've made to the data? Am I banned from those too?

5) I have to ensure that any person I give the data to is bound by the terms of use. This is nearly impossible to do over the internet. For example, in the United States a 10 year old child living in Vermont can't enter into a contract/agreement. There currently doesn't exist any reliable means to verify that some person on the internet is of legal age to accept the terms of use where she or he lives.

7) The terms of use for a specific data set I download at a specific time are variable over time. It isn't like software where version 1.0 has a certain license and version 2.0 has another. I have to constantly check to see if the terms of use have changed to see whether or not I can continue using the data. This could be fixed by including a copy of the terms of use with each data set, and making the terms of use static for that data set.

8) The terms of use aren't bundled with the data set, they are at a URL. I can't give someone without internet access a printed map because the terms of use are only available at a specific URL and I have no way of ensuring that the person agrees to them. I could print the terms of use, but they could be out of date by the time I give someone the printed map. This could be fixed by including a copy of the terms of use with each data set, and making the terms of use static for that data set.

9) The data can be distributed in "all current and future media and formats for any lawful purpose" including proprietary formats or DRM-enabled formats. This could be fixed by requiring open standards when distributing the data.

10) The terms are vague in some areas. I would be responsible for ensuring that my use and reproduction of the data complies with industry standards. This seems very vague and could imply that if my usage doesn't conform to an ANSI, ISO, IEEE, EMCA, etc standard I am in violation of the terms of use.

11) . I live in Gatineau and even if all my accessing and usage of the data sets takes place in Quebec I have to "irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of Ontario courts."

The Solution:

While it might seem tempting to debate some or all of the points I've raised and modify the current license, I think it would be much better to use an existing Open Data license. The people who develop open data licenses usually consult the public and examine the different ways data will be used both online and in real life. Also, when a widely used open data license is employed, it makes mashing up similarly licensed data sets easy. I suggest the Open Database License 1.0 http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/

terms of use: http://ottawa.ca/onlineservices/opendata/termsen.html