copyright issues with extracting data from city report
Locked
copyright issues with extracting data from city report
 
|
Hello everyone,
My name is Regie Alam. I work as a GIS Data Analyst at Terrapoint in Ottawa. I just signed up to the mailing list and this is my first post. I am in the process of digitizing boundaries of Urban Natural Areas in Ottawa. I'm digitizing off maps contained in a report made by a contractor to the City of Ottawa. My intent is to display the digitized maps on the internet using a webmapping program or Google Earth. This is not a commercial endeavour but just a way to make the data more accessible (through webmapping platform). What are the copyright issues involved with this? What about specifically for extracting (and presenting the data in another medium) data/maps off a report to the city? I already contacted the contact person for the report and she said the city won't be able to support this project. She also gave me a snippet of the Canadian Copyright Law regarding the internet and copyright. Thanks, Regie |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Regie;
That is a really interesting question. I am not an expert in this area however here are some of questions worth answering/considering. There are a few experts who have some knowledge in this area on the list: 1. What exactly was the report authors response? 2. This is a value added exercise, it is for non commercial purposes,correct? 3. you are using the original dataset simply for reference purposes correct? 4. You are creating a new dataset based on the base map reference. correct? 5. Were you going to share the file under a cc license at all? Were you going to attribute the refence dataset you are digitizing from (i.e. in the metadata etc.)? 6. You are not selling this information, correct? 7. Is the contractor's report a public document? 8. do those boundary files only exist in that report or do they exist elsewhere? 9. Does the city have that dataset? 10. You are replicating a file, in other words you are replicating a pre-existing work which means making a copy but in another software. Would this be analogous to re-typing a quote from a book in a new format? 11. Who has the original copyright for that? The report authors or the city? Can anyone else help? Tracey On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Regie Alam <[hidden email]> wrote: Hello everyone, -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Hello Tracey, Please find my answers embedded below. Thanks, Regie --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> wrote: > Regie; > > That is a really interesting question. I am not an > expert in this area > however here are some of questions worth > answering/considering. There are a > few experts who have some knowledge in this area on > the list: > > 1. What exactly was the report authors response? I haven't contacted the author yet. I did contact the city staff that was listed as the contact person for the project (http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/environment/city_hall/getgreen/greenspace/evaluation_study_en.html). Her response was that the city won't be able to support the use of city information in another form on the internet. > 2. This is a value added exercise, it is for non > commercial > purposes,correct? Yes, it is for non-commercial use. > 3. you are using the original dataset simply for > reference purposes correct? The boundaries of the Urban Natural Areas are in .pdf format which are contained in a report. I am digitizing the boundaries based on these .pdf files. So, yes the maps are for reference purposes but I'm also digitizing the actual boundaries (my digitized boundaries would be similar to their boundaries). > 4. You are creating a new dataset based on the base > map reference. correct? The vector maps that will be the result of my digitizing would presumably be similar to the ones they have (if indeed they have a vector dataset). > 5. Were you going to share the file under a cc > license at all? Were you > going to attribute the refence dataset you are > digitizing from (i.e. in the > metadata etc.)? Yes. > 6. You are not selling this information, correct? No, I won't be selling the information. > 7. Is the contractor's report a public document? I think it is. I actually got hold of the report from the public library. The whole report including the maps were in CDs at the back of the report so I copied everything and did the digitizing at home. > 8. do those boundary files only exist in that > report or do they exist > elsewhere? I am not sure if the dataset also exist somewhere else. > 9. Does the city have that dataset? I am not sure. I will ask the contact person. > 10. You are replicating a file, in other words you > are replicating a > pre-existing work which means making a copy but in > another software. Would > this be analogous to re-typing a quote from a book > in a new format? I'd like to find out if that is the case. > 11. Who has the original copyright for that? The > report authors or the > city? I'd like to find out this one too. > > Can anyone else help? > > Tracey > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Regie Alam > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > My name is Regie Alam. I work as a GIS Data > Analyst > > at Terrapoint in Ottawa. I just signed up to the > > mailing list and this is my first post. > > > > I am in the process of digitizing boundaries of > > Urban Natural Areas in Ottawa. I'm digitizing off > maps > > contained in a report made by a contractor to the > City > > of Ottawa. My intent is to display the digitized > maps > > on the internet using a webmapping program or > > Earth. > > > > This is not a commercial endeavour but just a > way > > to make the data more accessible (through > webmapping > > platform). > > > > What are the copyright issues involved with > this? > > What about specifically for extracting (and > presenting > > the data in another medium) data/maps off a report > to > > the city? > > > > I already contacted the contact person for the > > report and she said the city won't be able to > support > > this project. She also gave me a snippet of the > > Canadian Copyright Law regarding the internet and > > copyright. > > > > Thanks, > > Regie > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > -- > Tracey P. Lauriault > 613-234-2805 > https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Thanks Reggie!
I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who knows these things and hope they will respond. I feel the same way about the last two questions as well, and I am also not sure the official's response is correct either. She sent you the copyright act but did she send you anything about licenses? hmmm. Cheers t On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Regie Alam <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Tracey P. Lauriault wrote:
> Thanks Reggie! > > I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who knows these things and hope > they will respond. I feel the same way about the last two questions as > well, and I am also not sure the official's response is correct either. > She sent you the copyright act but did she send you anything about licenses? I am assuming that I was one of those people, as this came into my inbox as well as via the list. Basic underlying question: Yes, maps can have copyright. We can have an interesting policy debate about whether that makes sense, and whether they should be considered artistic works, but they do have copyright. From the Copyright act: ""artistic work" includes paintings, drawings, maps, charts, plans, photographs, engravings, sculptures, works of artistic craftsmanship, architectural works, and compilations of artistic works;" The only ways that maps, charts or plans are different comes to public exhibitions, where permission is required for other artistic works, but not maps, charts or plans. That doesn't affect this situation, which involves digitizing maps in a report. The human listed as the author of this report doesn't likely hold copyright on the report. In most cases these days it is the employer that hold copyright over anything done while someone is at work. You will need to find out who that copyright holder is -- the author may or may not be helpful, but you don't have to rely on only them to find out who the copyright holder is and seek the required permission (license). The other issue may be that the municipality doesn't own the source data upon which their own report is built, so they may not have the ability to grant you permission at all. They may themselves be relying on a license to be able to publish the report at all. I didn't look closely, but the page http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/environment/city_hall/getgreen/greenspace/evaluation_study_en.html says a study was commissioned -- which may mean the municipality doesn't own anything. This is also a problem I often see with the feds that have a policy that says the private sector company retains any PCT from work done for the government, and the government only receives an open license to use the works. Folks at TBS are trying to get that changed so that the works would be under a public license, and not just a license available to a specific subset of the public sector. There is also a general problem I've seen within bureaucracies with understanding copyright, what it is useful for, and when it is an inappropriate tool. What they often want is waiver from liability for any republication or derivative use, and clear attribution (IE: who the author of the original is, and how any republications or derivatives can't claim they are the official version). All these things could be accomplished with a liberal copyright licenses, while using trademark to deal with attribution/official-versions, but nobody ever bothers to get a policy set on this. Of course, pushing all levels of government to spend the time to create good policies on this is part of what CivicAccess is all about. Sorry I can't offer any specifics on this situation, and can only come up with more questions... -- Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition! http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/ict/ "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or portable media player from my cold dead hands!" |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
In reply to this post by Tracey P. Lauriault
I went and looked at the THE DISSEMINATION OF GOVERNMENT GEOGRAPHIC DATA IN CANADA GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES - http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/html/summary_e.html
I perused the pdf document - http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/Guide_to_Best_Practices_v12_finale_e.pdf Read Chapter 3 & 4, particularly sections - 4.1.2 (i) Contour of Copyright Protection (ii) Derived Works 4.1.3 Raw Data is not Protected under the Copyright Act 4.1.4 Data Sets as Protected Compilations under the Copyright Act Case Study Compilation There is some ambiguity. It is interesting to note that the government is producing data for the best interest of the government and for government use but not necessarily for the public it represents. I believe we have a public access / use issue, when it comes to government and the copyright act i believe we need to push for more progressive licensing. This document also contains references to the federal TBS policies, Communications Policies etc. in section 3 that are worth reading. You will note that I sent a question regarding provincial and territorial regulations etc. Finally, this is an interesting case and Regie, I hope you will continue to pursue it. See if the City has that vector file and see if they will share it and if then lets see where to go next. Cheers Tracey On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Hello Tracey, Thanks for looking into this. Yes, I'll definitely pursue this. I have a feeling that the city do not have official policies with things like this. It might be ripe for pushing for policies that promote open access of city data to the public. Regie --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> wrote: > I went and looked at the *T*HE DISSEMINATION OF > GOVERNMENT *GEOGRAPHIC DATA > IN CANADA** GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES - > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/html/summary_e.html > > *I perused the pdf document - > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/Guide_to_Best_Practices_v12_finale_e.pdf > * > > Read Chapter 3 & 4, particularly sections - > 4.1.2 (i) Contour of Copyright Protection (ii) > Derived Works > 4.1.3 Raw Data is not Protected under the Copyright > Act > 4.1.4 Data Sets as Protected Compilations under the > Copyright Act > Case Study Compilation > > *There is some ambiguity. It is interesting to note > that the government is > producing data for the best interest of the > government and for government > use but not necessarily for the public it > represents. I believe we have a > public access / use issue, when it comes to > government and the copyright act > i believe we need to push for more progressive > licensing. This document > also contains references to the federal TBS > policies, Communications > Policies etc. in *section 3* that are worth reading. > You will note that I > sent a question regarding provincial and territorial > regulations etc. > Finally, this is an interesting case and Regie, I > hope you will continue to > pursue it. See if the City has that vector file and > see if they will share > it and if then lets see where to go next. > > Cheers > Tracey > > * > > > *On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tracey P. > Lauriault <[hidden email]>wrote: > > > Thanks Reggie! > > > > I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who knows > these things and hope > > they will respond. I feel the same way about the > last two questions as > > well, and I am also not sure the official's > response is correct either. She > > sent you the copyright act but did she send you > anything about licenses? > > > > hmmm. > > > > Cheers > > t > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Regie Alam > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > >> > >> Hello Tracey, > >> > >> Please find my answers embedded below. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Regie > >> > >> > >> --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> > >> > Regie; > >> > > >> > That is a really interesting question. I am > not an > >> > expert in this area > >> > however here are some of questions worth > >> > answering/considering. There are a > >> > few experts who have some knowledge in this > area on > >> > the list: > >> > > >> > 1. What exactly was the report authors > response? > >> > >> I haven't contacted the author yet. I did contact > the > >> city staff that was listed as the contact person > for > >> the project > >> ( > >> > > >> ). > >> > >> Her response was that the city won't be able to > >> support the use of city information in another > form on > >> the internet. > >> > >> > 2. This is a value added exercise, it is for > non > >> > commercial > >> > purposes,correct? > >> > >> Yes, it is for non-commercial use. > >> > >> > 3. you are using the original dataset simply > for > >> > reference purposes correct? > >> > >> The boundaries of the Urban Natural Areas are in > >> format which are contained in a report. I am > >> digitizing the boundaries based on these .pdf > files. > >> So, yes the maps are for reference purposes but > I'm > >> also digitizing the actual boundaries (my > digitized > >> boundaries would be similar to their boundaries). > >> > >> > 4. You are creating a new dataset based on the > base > >> > map reference. correct? > >> > >> The vector maps that will be the result of my > >> digitizing would presumably be similar to the > ones > >> they have (if indeed they have a vector dataset). > >> > >> > 5. Were you going to share the file under a cc > >> > license at all? Were you > >> > going to attribute the refence dataset you are > >> > digitizing from (i.e. in the > >> > metadata etc.)? > >> > >> Yes. > >> > >> > 6. You are not selling this information, > correct? > >> > >> No, I won't be selling the information. > >> > >> > 7. Is the contractor's report a public > document? > >> > >> I think it is. I actually got hold of the report > from > >> the public library. The whole report including > the > >> maps were in CDs at the back of the report so I > copied > >> everything and did the digitizing at home. > >> > >> > >> > 8. do those boundary files only exist in that > >> > report or do they exist > >> > elsewhere? > >> > >> I am not sure if the dataset also exist somewhere > >> else. > >> > >> > 9. Does the city have that dataset? > >> > >> I am not sure. I will ask the contact person. > >> > >> > 10. You are replicating a file, in other words > you > >> > are replicating a > >> > pre-existing work which means making a copy but > in > >> > another software. Would > >> > this be analogous to re-typing a quote from a > book > >> > in a new format? > >> > >> I'd like to find out if that is the case. > >> > >> > 11. Who has the original copyright for that? > The > >> > report authors or the > >> > city? > >> > >> I'd like to find out this one too. > >> > >> > > >> > Can anyone else help? > >> > > >> > Tracey > >> > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
hi everyone ~
If it is timely to push for policies to promote OA of public data, the library community may be able to help, e.g. writing letters of support for an OA policy. I work with the Canadian Library Association in this area, and would be happy to draft a letter of support. Public data policies need to address privacy concerns as well as open access; it is a good idea to address this from the outset, otherwise policy development could be slowed down. Any opinion expressed in this e-mail is that of the author alone, and does not represent the opinion or policy of BC Electronic Library Network or Simon Fraser University Library. Heather Morrison, MLIS The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com On 13-Aug-08, at 5:04 AM, Regie Alam wrote: > > Hello Tracey, > > Thanks for looking into this. Yes, I'll definitely > pursue this. I have a feeling that the city do not > have official policies with things like this. It might > be ripe for pushing for policies that promote open > access of city data to the public. > > Regie > > > --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> I went and looked at the *T*HE DISSEMINATION OF >> GOVERNMENT *GEOGRAPHIC DATA >> IN CANADA** GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES - >> > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/ > html/summary_e.html >> >> *I perused the pdf document - >> > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/ > Guide_to_Best_Practices_v12_finale_e.pdf >> * >> >> Read Chapter 3 & 4, particularly sections - >> 4.1.2 (i) Contour of Copyright Protection (ii) >> Derived Works >> 4.1.3 Raw Data is not Protected under the Copyright >> Act >> 4.1.4 Data Sets as Protected Compilations under the >> Copyright Act >> Case Study Compilation >> >> *There is some ambiguity. It is interesting to note >> that the government is >> producing data for the best interest of the >> government and for government >> use but not necessarily for the public it >> represents. I believe we have a >> public access / use issue, when it comes to >> government and the copyright act >> i believe we need to push for more progressive >> licensing. This document >> also contains references to the federal TBS >> policies, Communications >> Policies etc. in *section 3* that are worth reading. >> You will note that I >> sent a question regarding provincial and territorial >> regulations etc. >> Finally, this is an interesting case and Regie, I >> hope you will continue to >> pursue it. See if the City has that vector file and >> see if they will share >> it and if then lets see where to go next. >> >> Cheers >> Tracey >> >> * >> >> >> *On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tracey P. >> Lauriault <[hidden email]>wrote: >> >>> Thanks Reggie! >>> >>> I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who knows >> these things and hope >>> they will respond. I feel the same way about the >> last two questions as >>> well, and I am also not sure the official's >> response is correct either. She >>> sent you the copyright act but did she send you >> anything about licenses? >>> >>> hmmm. >>> >>> Cheers >>> t >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Regie Alam >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hello Tracey, >>>> >>>> Please find my answers embedded below. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Regie >>>> >>>> >>>> --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Regie; >>>>> >>>>> That is a really interesting question. I am >> not an >>>>> expert in this area >>>>> however here are some of questions worth >>>>> answering/considering. There are a >>>>> few experts who have some knowledge in this >> area on >>>>> the list: >>>>> >>>>> 1. What exactly was the report authors >> response? >>>> >>>> I haven't contacted the author yet. I did contact >> the >>>> city staff that was listed as the contact person >> for >>>> the project >>>> ( >>>> >> > http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/environment/city_hall/getgreen/ > greenspace/evaluation_study_en.html >>>> ). >>>> >>>> Her response was that the city won't be able to >>>> support the use of city information in another >> form on >>>> the internet. >>>> >>>>> 2. This is a value added exercise, it is for >> non >>>>> commercial >>>>> purposes,correct? >>>> >>>> Yes, it is for non-commercial use. >>>> >>>>> 3. you are using the original dataset simply >> for >>>>> reference purposes correct? >>>> >>>> The boundaries of the Urban Natural Areas are in >>>> format which are contained in a report. I am >>>> digitizing the boundaries based on these .pdf >> files. >>>> So, yes the maps are for reference purposes but >> I'm >>>> also digitizing the actual boundaries (my >> digitized >>>> boundaries would be similar to their boundaries). >>>> >>>>> 4. You are creating a new dataset based on the >> base >>>>> map reference. correct? >>>> >>>> The vector maps that will be the result of my >>>> digitizing would presumably be similar to the >> ones >>>> they have (if indeed they have a vector dataset). >>>> >>>>> 5. Were you going to share the file under a cc >>>>> license at all? Were you >>>>> going to attribute the refence dataset you are >>>>> digitizing from (i.e. in the >>>>> metadata etc.)? >>>> >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>>> 6. You are not selling this information, >> correct? >>>> >>>> No, I won't be selling the information. >>>> >>>>> 7. Is the contractor's report a public >> document? >>>> >>>> I think it is. I actually got hold of the report >> from >>>> the public library. The whole report including >> the >>>> maps were in CDs at the back of the report so I >> copied >>>> everything and did the digitizing at home. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 8. do those boundary files only exist in that >>>>> report or do they exist >>>>> elsewhere? >>>> >>>> I am not sure if the dataset also exist somewhere >>>> else. >>>> >>>>> 9. Does the city have that dataset? >>>> >>>> I am not sure. I will ask the contact person. >>>> >>>>> 10. You are replicating a file, in other words >> you >>>>> are replicating a >>>>> pre-existing work which means making a copy but >> in >>>>> another software. Would >>>>> this be analogous to re-typing a quote from a >> book >>>>> in a new format? >>>> >>>> I'd like to find out if that is the case. >>>> >>>>> 11. Who has the original copyright for that? >> The >>>>> report authors or the >>>>> city? >>>> >>>> I'd like to find out this one too. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can anyone else help? >>>>> >>>>> Tracey >>>>> >> > === message truncated ===> > _______________________________________________ >> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> [hidden email] >> > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
That is awesome Heather!
Regie are you in Ottawa? if so did you want to meet up and discuss some possible ideas and next steps? Anyone else on the list in Ottawa interested in this? Cheers t On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Heather Morrison <[hidden email]> wrote: hi everyone ~ -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Hi Tracey, Yes, I'm in Ottawa. I would be interested in a meeting. Regie --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> wrote: > That is awesome Heather! > > Regie are you in Ottawa? if so did you want to meet > up and discuss some > possible ideas and next steps? > > Anyone else on the list in Ottawa interested in > this? > > Cheers > t > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Heather Morrison > <[hidden email]>wrote: > > > hi everyone ~ > > > > If it is timely to push for policies to promote OA > of public data, the > > library community may be able to help, e.g. > writing letters of support for > > an OA policy. I work with the Canadian Library > Association in this area, > > and would be happy to draft a letter of support. > > > > Public data policies need to address privacy > concerns as well as open > > access; it is a good idea to address this from the > outset, otherwise policy > > development could be slowed down. > > > > Any opinion expressed in this e-mail is that of > the author alone, and does > > not represent the opinion or policy of BC > Electronic Library Network or > > Simon Fraser University Library. > > > > Heather Morrison, MLIS > > The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics > > http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com > > > > > > On 13-Aug-08, at 5:04 AM, Regie Alam wrote: > > > > > >> Hello Tracey, > >> > >> Thanks for looking into this. Yes, I'll > definitely > >> pursue this. I have a feeling that the city do > not > >> have official policies with things like this. It > might > >> be ripe for pushing for policies that promote > open > >> access of city data to the public. > >> > >> Regie > >> > >> > >> --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> > >> I went and looked at the *T*HE DISSEMINATION OF > >>> GOVERNMENT *GEOGRAPHIC DATA > >>> IN CANADA** GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES - > >>> > >>> > > >> html/summary_e.html > >> > >>> > >>> *I perused the pdf document - > >>> > >>> > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/ > >> Guide_to_Best_Practices_v12_finale_e.pdf > >> > >>> * > >>> > >>> Read Chapter 3 & 4, particularly sections - > >>> 4.1.2 (i) Contour of Copyright Protection (ii) > >>> Derived Works > >>> 4.1.3 Raw Data is not Protected under the > Copyright > >>> Act > >>> 4.1.4 Data Sets as Protected Compilations under > the > >>> Copyright Act > >>> Case Study Compilation > >>> > >>> *There is some ambiguity. It is interesting to > note > >>> that the government is > >>> producing data for the best interest of the > >>> government and for government > >>> use but not necessarily for the public it > >>> represents. I believe we have a > >>> public access / use issue, when it comes to > >>> government and the copyright act > >>> i believe we need to push for more progressive > >>> licensing. This document > >>> also contains references to the federal TBS > >>> policies, Communications > >>> Policies etc. in *section 3* that are worth > reading. > >>> You will note that I > >>> sent a question regarding provincial and > territorial > >>> regulations etc. > >>> Finally, this is an interesting case and Regie, > I > >>> hope you will continue to > >>> pursue it. See if the City has that vector file > and > >>> see if they will share > >>> it and if then lets see where to go next. > >>> > >>> Cheers > >>> Tracey > >>> > >>> * > >>> > >>> > >>> *On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tracey P. > >>> Lauriault <[hidden email]>wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks Reggie! > >>>> > >>>> I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who > knows > >>>> > >>> these things and hope > >>> > >>>> they will respond. I feel the same way about > the > >>>> > >>> last two questions as > >>> > >>>> well, and I am also not sure the official's > >>>> > >>> response is correct either. She > >>> > >>>> sent you the copyright act but did she send you > >>>> > >>> anything about licenses? > >>> > >>>> > >>>> hmmm. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers > >>>> t > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Regie Alam > >>>> > >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Hello Tracey, > >>>>> > >>>>> Please find my answers embedded below. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Regie > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> > >>>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>>> Regie; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That is a really interesting question. I am > >>>>>> > >>>>> not an > >>> > >>>> expert in this area > >>>>>> however here are some of questions worth > >>>>>> answering/considering. There are a > >>>>>> few experts who have some knowledge in this > >>>>>> > >>>>> area on > >>> > >>>> the list: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. What exactly was the report authors > >>>>>> > >>>>> response? > >>> > >>>> > >>>>> I haven't contacted the author yet. I did > contact > >>>>> > >>>> the > >>> > >>>> city staff that was listed as the contact > person > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
How about next week sometime? Wednesday?
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Regie Alam <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
In reply to this post by Heather Morrison
Hello, It may also be important to include the items listed by Russell in his posting (I quote a part of his posting below): "What they often want is waiver from liability for any republication or derivative use, and clear attribution (IE: who the author of the original is, and how any republications or derivatives can't claim they are the official version). All these things could be accomplished with a liberal copyright licenses, while using trademark to deal with attribution/official-versions, but nobody ever bothers to get a policy set on this." Thanks, Regie --- Heather Morrison <[hidden email]> wrote: > hi everyone ~ > > If it is timely to push for policies to promote OA > of public data, > the library community may be able to help, e.g. > writing letters of > support for an OA policy. I work with the Canadian > Library > Association in this area, and would be happy to > draft a letter of > support. > > Public data policies need to address privacy > concerns as well as open > access; it is a good idea to address this from the > outset, otherwise > policy development could be slowed down. > > Any opinion expressed in this e-mail is that of the > author alone, and > does not represent the opinion or policy of BC > Electronic Library > Network or Simon Fraser University Library. > > Heather Morrison, MLIS > The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics > http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com > > On 13-Aug-08, at 5:04 AM, Regie Alam wrote: > > > > > Hello Tracey, > > > > Thanks for looking into this. Yes, I'll > definitely > > pursue this. I have a feeling that the city do not > > have official policies with things like this. It > might > > be ripe for pushing for policies that promote open > > access of city data to the public. > > > > Regie > > > > > > --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > >> I went and looked at the *T*HE DISSEMINATION OF > >> GOVERNMENT *GEOGRAPHIC DATA > >> IN CANADA** GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES - > >> > > > > > > html/summary_e.html > >> > >> *I perused the pdf document - > >> > > > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/ > > > Guide_to_Best_Practices_v12_finale_e.pdf > >> * > >> > >> Read Chapter 3 & 4, particularly sections - > >> 4.1.2 (i) Contour of Copyright Protection (ii) > >> Derived Works > >> 4.1.3 Raw Data is not Protected under the > Copyright > >> Act > >> 4.1.4 Data Sets as Protected Compilations under > the > >> Copyright Act > >> Case Study Compilation > >> > >> *There is some ambiguity. It is interesting to > note > >> that the government is > >> producing data for the best interest of the > >> government and for government > >> use but not necessarily for the public it > >> represents. I believe we have a > >> public access / use issue, when it comes to > >> government and the copyright act > >> i believe we need to push for more progressive > >> licensing. This document > >> also contains references to the federal TBS > >> policies, Communications > >> Policies etc. in *section 3* that are worth > reading. > >> You will note that I > >> sent a question regarding provincial and > territorial > >> regulations etc. > >> Finally, this is an interesting case and Regie, I > >> hope you will continue to > >> pursue it. See if the City has that vector file > and > >> see if they will share > >> it and if then lets see where to go next. > >> > >> Cheers > >> Tracey > >> > >> * > >> > >> > >> *On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tracey P. > >> Lauriault <[hidden email]>wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks Reggie! > >>> > >>> I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who > knows > >> these things and hope > >>> they will respond. I feel the same way about > the > >> last two questions as > >>> well, and I am also not sure the official's > >> response is correct either. She > >>> sent you the copyright act but did she send you > >> anything about licenses? > >>> > >>> hmmm. > >>> > >>> Cheers > >>> t > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Regie Alam > >> <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Hello Tracey, > >>>> > >>>> Please find my answers embedded below. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Regie > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Regie; > >>>>> > >>>>> That is a really interesting question. I am > >> not an > >>>>> expert in this area > >>>>> however here are some of questions worth > >>>>> answering/considering. There are a > >>>>> few experts who have some knowledge in this > >> area on > >>>>> the list: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. What exactly was the report authors > >> response? > >>>> > >>>> I haven't contacted the author yet. I did > contact > >> the > >>>> city staff that was listed as the contact > person > >> for > >>>> the project > >>>> ( > >>>> > >> > > > > > > greenspace/evaluation_study_en.html > >>>> ). > >>>> > >>>> Her response was that the city won't be able to > >>>> support the use of city information in another > >> form on > >>>> the internet. > >>>> > >>>>> 2. This is a value added exercise, it is for > >> non > >>>>> commercial > >>>>> purposes,correct? > >>>> > >>>> Yes, it is for non-commercial use. > >>>> > >>>>> 3. you are using the original dataset simply > >> for > >>>>> reference purposes correct? > >>>> > >>>> The boundaries of the Urban Natural Areas are > in > >>>> format which are contained in a report. I am > >>>> digitizing the boundaries based on these .pdf > >> files. > >>>> So, yes the maps are for reference purposes but > >> I'm > >>>> also digitizing the actual boundaries (my > >> digitized > >>>> boundaries would be similar to their > boundaries). > |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
In reply to this post by Tracey P. Lauriault
Hi Tracey, I should be ok with Wednesday next week. Let me know when and where (preferably after I get off work at 3:30pm). Regie --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> wrote: > How about next week sometime? Wednesday? > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Regie Alam > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Tracey, > > > > Yes, I'm in Ottawa. I would be interested in a > > meeting. > > > > Regie > > > > --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > > That is awesome Heather! > > > > > > Regie are you in Ottawa? if so did you want to > meet > > > up and discuss some > > > possible ideas and next steps? > > > > > > Anyone else on the list in Ottawa interested in > > > this? > > > > > > Cheers > > > t > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Heather > Morrison > > > <[hidden email]>wrote: > > > > > > > hi everyone ~ > > > > > > > > If it is timely to push for policies to > promote OA > > > of public data, the > > > > library community may be able to help, e.g. > > > writing letters of support for > > > > an OA policy. I work with the Canadian > Library > > > Association in this area, > > > > and would be happy to draft a letter of > support. > > > > > > > > Public data policies need to address privacy > > > concerns as well as open > > > > access; it is a good idea to address this from > the > > > outset, otherwise policy > > > > development could be slowed down. > > > > > > > > Any opinion expressed in this e-mail is that > of > > > the author alone, and does > > > > not represent the opinion or policy of BC > > > Electronic Library Network or > > > > Simon Fraser University Library. > > > > > > > > Heather Morrison, MLIS > > > > The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics > > > > http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > > > On 13-Aug-08, at 5:04 AM, Regie Alam wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hello Tracey, > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for looking into this. Yes, I'll > > > definitely > > > >> pursue this. I have a feeling that the city > do > > > not > > > >> have official policies with things like this. > It > > > might > > > >> be ripe for pushing for policies that promote > > > open > > > >> access of city data to the public. > > > >> > > > >> Regie > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> --- "Tracey P. Lauriault" > <[hidden email]> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I went and looked at the *T*HE > DISSEMINATION OF > > > >>> GOVERNMENT *GEOGRAPHIC DATA > > > >>> IN CANADA** GUIDE TO BEST PRACTICES - > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> html/summary_e.html > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>> *I perused the pdf document - > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/Best_practices_guide/ > > > >> Guide_to_Best_Practices_v12_finale_e.pdf > > > >> > > > >>> * > > > >>> > > > >>> Read Chapter 3 & 4, particularly sections - > > > >>> 4.1.2 (i) Contour of Copyright Protection > (ii) > > > >>> Derived Works > > > >>> 4.1.3 Raw Data is not Protected under the > > > Copyright > > > >>> Act > > > >>> 4.1.4 Data Sets as Protected Compilations > under > > > the > > > >>> Copyright Act > > > >>> Case Study Compilation > > > >>> > > > >>> *There is some ambiguity. It is interesting > to > > > note > > > >>> that the government is > > > >>> producing data for the best interest of the > > > >>> government and for government > > > >>> use but not necessarily for the public it > > > >>> represents. I believe we have a > > > >>> public access / use issue, when it comes to > > > >>> government and the copyright act > > > >>> i believe we need to push for more > progressive > > > >>> licensing. This document > > > >>> also contains references to the federal TBS > > > >>> policies, Communications > > > >>> Policies etc. in *section 3* that are worth > > > reading. > > > >>> You will note that I > > > >>> sent a question regarding provincial and > > > territorial > > > >>> regulations etc. > > > >>> Finally, this is an interesting case and > Regie, > > > I > > > >>> hope you will continue to > > > >>> pursue it. See if the City has that vector > file > > > and > > > >>> see if they will share > > > >>> it and if then lets see where to go next. > > > >>> > > > >>> Cheers > > > >>> Tracey > > > >>> > > > >>> * > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> *On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tracey P. > > > >>> Lauriault <[hidden email]>wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks Reggie! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I'll ask around, and I have bcc someone who > > > knows > > > >>>> > > > >>> these things and hope > > > >>> > > > >>>> they will respond. I feel the same way > about > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> last two questions as > > > >>> > > > >>>> well, and I am also not sure the official's > > > >>>> > > > >>> response is correct either. She > > > >>> > > > >>>> sent you the copyright act but did she send > you > > > >>>> > > > >>> anything about licenses? > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> hmmm. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Cheers > > > >>>> t > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Regie Alam > > > >>>> > > > >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Hello Tracey, > > > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: copyright issues with extracting data from city report
|
|
Hey Regie! where would you like to meet? Are you in the downtown area? Anyone else like to join? I am thinking around 5 or 6 pm. Location tbd!
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Regie Alam <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
«
Return to CivicAccess
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |