Update Google Custom Search (GCS) and add 2024Q4 report

[TimidRobot]

Description

Update Google Custom Search (GCS) and add 2024Q4 report

• Update Google Custom Search (GCS) processing and GCS reporting
• Update GCS processed data
• Improve consistency and organization of code
• Report: data/2024Q4/README.md

Technical details

Report was generated with the following complex command (hard wrapped for readability):

rm -f data/2024Q4/README.md data/2024Q4/3-report/gcs_*
pipenv run ./scripts/3-report/gcs_report.py --quarter 2024Q4 --enable-save \
    && echo \
    && pipenv run ./scripts/3-report/notes.py --quarter 2024Q4 --enable-save \

Checklist

• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title like Update index.md).
• My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main or master).
• My commit messages follow best practices.
• My code follows the established code style of the repository.
• I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
• I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
• I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no
  visible errors.

Developer Certificate of Origin

For the purposes of this DCO, "license" is equivalent to "license or public domain dedication," and "open source license" is equivalent to "open content license or public domain dedication."

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

[possumbilities]

A remarkable amount of valuable work! Well done!

[naishasinha]

Looks really good!

[shinchpearson]

In the report, there is a typo in the Approved for Free Cultural Works section. It says, "For more information on retired legal tools" but should say "For more information on the free cultural works designation" (or something to that effect).

I am mildly skeptical of the utility of that section. Is the free cultural works designation still a relevant and known way of characterizing the licenses? Even if yes, I think it could use more description for those who are not familiar. (I had to click on the link to make sure I was understanding what was meant to "limited use" licenses.)

[TimidRobot]

@shinchpearson

In the report, there is a typo in the Approved for Free Cultural Works section. It says, "For more information on retired legal tools" but should say "For more information on the free cultural works designation" (or something to that effect).

✅ Oops, corrected replaced with quote for additional context.

I am mildly skeptical of the utility of that section. Is the free cultural works designation still a relevant and known way of characterizing the licenses?

We've received community input that it is still an important designation. Even if we decided that it was trivially important, the cost of generating the section is minuscule--it doesn't require any special queries or graphing, just parameters and the description.

Even if yes, I think it could use more description for those who are not familiar. (I had to click on the link to make sure I was understanding what was meant to "limited use" licenses.)

✅ I added a block quote from the info page to provide more context.