Openness notice should be clearer

[dread]

ckan-discuss discussion suggests changes to the 'openness' indicator ( ​http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/ckan-discuss/2011-October/001786.html )

Dataset view page:

• If there is an explicit but non-OKD compliant license, such as CC-BY-NC, then this should be stated explicitly, perhaps: “This dataset is Not Open. License: Creative Commons Attribution Noncommerical. This is not an open license as it does not meet the Open Knowledge Definition.”
• If the license is marked as “Other::License Not Specified”, then this should be stated explicitly, perhaps: “This dataset is Not Open. It is published without an explicit license, the publisher reserves all rights to the dataset.”
• 3. If the license field was left empty by the contributor of the Data Hub record, then again this should be stated explicitly, perhaps: “This dataset is Not Open. The license of this dataset is unknown or unspecified. Start an enquiry on IsItOpenData? »
• There is a bug so that non-open licenses doesn't have an openness notice.
• If downloadable resources are not available, this should not affect 'openness' - check this has been removed.