Probably all else I need fwd to Lis-maps . . .? No comfort to David
Archer, I guess. (Posting abbreviated at end)
Francis Herbert
-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maps-L Moderator
Sent: 26 November 2008 19:31
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Maps-L - "The Mapping Mess: Google vs. British OS"
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Maps-L - "The Mapping Mess: Google vs. British OS"
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:59:23 -0800
From: Mano Marks <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
References: <[log in to unmask]>
Russell,
The original article actually said nothing about Google wanting OS
data for free. I said that OS was concerned about our license terms
and therefore didn't want localities to present OS data on Google
Maps, to avoid the possibility of Google gaining license, due to the
OS's reading of the terms of service. Full disclosure, I work for
Google.
Mano Marks
Developer Advocate
Google
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Maps-L Moderator <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Maps-L - "The Mapping Mess: Google vs. British OS"
> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:43:23 -0000
> From: Nicholas Verge <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> References: <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Hi Russell,
>
> You stated...
>
> "The OS is supposed to be 100% self-funding and in theory receives no
> federal gov't funds, so unlike the USGS it is not supported by tax
> dollars. Currently income from the sales of paper maps is only about
> 10% of gross income, so license fees and digital data sales are the
bulk
> of their income."
>
> This is a somewhat innaccurate view of the current state of affairs in
the
> UK. The keyword in your paragraph is "theory".
>
> Your paragraph describes the view that the OS would like to present.
What
> the OS does not publicise is that the greatest proportion of its
digital
> data licensing revenues, comes from the licensing of its data to UK
> Government (local and national) and its agencies. Dont think for one
> minute that because the OS is a "trading fund" (a business wholely
owned
> by UK Government), that the UK Government gets access to OS data for
free.
> It dont.
> The problem is that the OS is a government agency that has been
granted
> permission to be run as a quasi-business and wrt data distribution it
a
> monopoly. (Strange as it may seem, the law governing OS data
distribution
> and use is the 1988 Copyright and Patent Act and specifically the
section
> on Crown Copyright (ie about UK Government produced information)).
>
> Moreover, the OS enjoys privelidges in UK law (eg right of access to
> anywhere in the UK, the obligation of local and national government to
> provide information to the OS about new developments etc) not provided
to
> any other private business and which might wish to compete in the
> provision of UK mapping. Such priveledges sustain its monopolistic
> position. Thus, we have the absurd position that government provides
> information to the OS, and then has to pay the OS for a license to use
> that information.
>
> This sorry state of affairs is the result of the shortsighted idiotic
> dogma of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and the Tory Party,
when
> what in power between 1979 and 1997. We are still suffering the
> consequences thirty years later!
>
> For more on mess around UK mapping and the reuse of other public
sector
> information, see
>
> http://www.freeourdata.org.uk/blog/
>
> Cheers
>
> Nicholas Verge
|