berlin5 : how to progress Open Data?

I'm putting together some ideas for my talk tomorrow – probably about 25-30 minutes. It's sometimes useful to set them out in the blog beforehand so I can refer to it as well as the slides.
The audience is roughly:

• funders
• librarians
• publishers (reader-pays and author-pays)
• governmental and non-governmental agencies
• researchers (like me)

For background I'm making the broad brush assumptions (and would welcome challenges).

• green access does not suit a lot of people and there is an increasing movement to insist on gold
• awareness of the importance of Data is increasing but it still a poor relation to "full-text"
• although there is quite a lot of activity in institutional digital repositories they won't (and shouldn't) address Data. It's subject-specific and too complex for the average repository manager.
• eTheses have an increasing importance
• BBB (BOAI) is a useful political and philosophic utterance but it isn't a licence. Licences are critical.
• funders increasingly understand the issues and that they are the most important agents of change

For the last 10 years we have stood still – the eJournal "revolution" has been stultifyingly stagnant. No new ideas for managing information, no new tools for innovation by authors and readers. And the open access publishers have concentrated so hard on the business model they have simply mimicked the commercial offerings. If the rest of the world had been as bad as this we wouldn't have Google, Flickr, etc. Their mantras – "Take risks and apologize later". "Just Do it".
I'll try not to concentrate on what is broken – at least not in detail. You can re-read this blog. What's broken is:

• publishers oppose change
• licences are non-existent or awful. Publishers do not clarify them, do not reply, create FUD.
• librarians have been cowed into submission
• the god of copyright is worshipped to paralysis
• young people are frightened of experimenting; old people are largely dismissive and antagonistic.

So my suggestions for positive action on Data:

• all funders should include statements requiring Open Data.
• subject repositories should be set up
• CC licences – or similar – should be required to define the actual practice
• eThesis deposition must be mandatory
• Open tools will be required and must be funded
• we must create effective advocacy for all parties: funders, provosts, researchers, repository managers

Advocacy will include self-sustaining demonstrators showing:

1. short-term archival ("I can get her thesis data"),
2. re-use ("I can mash his data with mine")
3. exposure ("they cited my paper because the robot found my data")
4. communities ("I found these other people in this field")
5. semantics ("I never thought of looking at the data in that way).
6. human value ("we can tackle this global problem with this data")

NOTE: I am publishing this before the presentation so that (a) I can link to it and (b) in case anyone wants to suggest modifications