Thanks for all the ideas. I am having another crack at it and see where I get...
Cheers Paul On 15 July 2010 11:09, Julian Todd <[email protected]> wrote: > I have made an annotation. > > Basically, read the reuse public sector information, and make requests > on the basis of it to establish whether they have done their homework > properly. > > They clearly have not if they are assigning conditions on the reuse of > data which they are not charging for. > > Julian. > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Francis Davey <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 13 July 2010 16:27, Francis Irving <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Legally, the ICO is right. > >> > > > > I haven't looked at the request in detail, but that seems correct to me. > > > >> If an authority already makes information available by another means, > >> whatever license or charge it makes, it doesn't have to release it to > >> you under FOI. > > > > The FOI is, in this respect, more restrictive than the EIR. The FOI > > requires that the information be "reasonably accessible" - where > > "reasonably" will exclude placing information at the bottom of locked > > filing cabinets (etc) but can include the payment of a fee. The "free" > > in "Freedom of Information" doesn't mean "without charge". > > > > The similar caveat in the EIR (section 6) requires that the > > information be "publicly available and easily accessible to the > > applicant" (so an objective/subjective approach), which is I think a > > little tougher. The EIR also contains a positive duty in section 4 to > > "progressively make the information available to the public by > > electronic means which are easily accessible ; and take reasonable > > steps to organize the information relevant to its functions with a > > view to the active and systematic dissemination to the public of the > > information.". > > > > If this is information falls within the EIR then you might be able to > > argue that the section 4 duty is not being complied with because it is > > awkward to access, but not because it is released under a licence. > > > >> > >> Moreover, release under FOI itself gives you no special rights to do > >> anything with the data at all (e.g. redistribute). Any such rights > >> would, in theory, have to be separately granted. > > > > Yes. And this is clearly barking. If everyone in the UK can, as of > > right, obtain the same information under FOI for free, preventing its > > republication without charge by a third party seems just exactly the > > kind of silly legalism we should not have in the 21st century. If > > there's an intention to commercially exploit information - there are > > exceptions to cover that case - otherwise it should all be out there > > and reusable by everyone. > > > > My Society is, I hope, using its influence to move us towards such a > > situation. We do what we can. > > > > Things are much better elsewhere. Earlier this year I gave a talk > > (ironically about copyright in images of pictures held in public > > libraries) and wanted various pictures to illustrate my talk. I was > > forced to do a lot of work to find images that were either free of > > copyright or for which I was able to obtain a free licence, but one > > image I used was contained in a German postage stamp which was free to > > reuse. Some places seem to take the role of the state more seriously > > than others. > > > > [good suggestions by Francis I snipped]. > > > > -- > > Francis Davey > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mailing list [email protected] > > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > > > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list [email protected] > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
