On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Kevin Kenny <kenn...@acm.org> wrote:
> On 01/23/2016 01:48 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: > >> New York courts are free to rule any way they want, but copyright >> doesn't allow you to own facts. This is well-adjudicated in higher >> courts. >> >> If you could claim a copyright on facts, you could control people's >> speech, and the First Amendment does not allow that. The freedom of >> factual information is very strongly protected in the US. No matter >> what Suffolk County thinks. > > This could have happened only in one of the handful of states that > allow copyright to subsist in government works. In most states, > government works, like those of the Federal government, are born > in the public domain. > Be it as it relates to the topic at hand, ie, Oklahoma Department of Recreation and Tourism's state park and state resort boundaries, I'm wondering if we can get our legal involved in reviewing the situation. I *think*, based on this thread, the copyright argument is moot anyway under the Oklahoma Open Records Act and ODRT's just being a stickler for bureaucracy. http://www.odl.state.ok.us/lawinfo/docs/2006-librarylaws-parte.pdf What's really odd is the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation does offer up their boundary data directly over the web... > I quite agree with you that it seems to contradict established law, > and conflict with constitutional principles of both freedom > of speech and open government, but until and unless the Supremes > speak on it again, it's precedent in the Second Circuit. > > The law is an ass. At least it's not 10th Circuit...I basically cringe every time anything relating to technology or e-business comes up in my circuit.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
