licensing

Rick Crowsey, of Crowsey Incorporated, forwarded me this article from the Washington Post on the increased use of GPS devices by law enforcement in Virginia. (The article notes that the Supreme Court has not ruled directly on the use of GPS devices by law enforcement without a warrant - although it has ruled that the use of tracking devices without one is permissible - but that other jurisdictions that have ruled on such uses of GPS devices are split.

The article raises a number of good points. I particularly liked this quote attributed to Craig Fraser of the Police Executive Research Forum: "The issue is whether the more sophisticated tools are doing the same things we used to do or are creating a different set of legal circumstances". I also noted that there is a poll question that is attached to the article. At this time, of approximately two respondents, 51% found the increased use of GPS to be a troubling trend while 42% found it to be a welcome step against crime.

New York City is going even further according to this report. According to the report, license plates of all cars and trucks entering Manhattan will be scanned and stored in databases (for upwards of a month.) The city also intends to add thousands more security cameras in Lower Manhattan as well as radiation detection devices to be used in a buffer zone around the city.

Thanks to Kara John of DMTI Spatial for forwarding me the recently completed version 2 of "The Dissemination of Government Geographic Data in Canada: Guide To Best Practices." It is a product of the GeoConnections Program and is the work of the Data Licensing Guide Working Group of which Kara and many others put in a good deal of effort. I am sure that the report will be posted on the GeoConnections website - I know that version 1 is available online - but feel free to contact me if you wish me to forward you a copy. It is an excellent resource for anyone working on spatial law issues, not simply for those working in Canada.

Privacy



So how many people "clean" their satellite navigation device before selling their car? According to this article, you probably should.



Google has admitted that it has been collecting - apparently without intent - private information (snippets from emails and on-line activities) from public Wi-Fi networks in connection with its Google Street View mapping efforts. (Google was also mapping public Wi-Fi networks as part of Street View). I have previously posted, there is great value in the street level imagery that Google is collecting. However, one can certainly appreciate the privacy concerns associated with any organization collecting this information - even if it was being sent over public (and presumably unsecured) Wi-Fi networks - particularly if the information was being collected as part of a broader mapping effort.



Licensing



For those interested in a well-rounded technical discussion of the issues associated with data sharing, I would recommend reading Peter Batty's geothought blog. It includes a link to a video of a roundtable discussion from GITA 2010 with a number of deep thinkers in this area, including Peter (as moderator), Steve Coast, James Fee, Andrew Turner and Ron Lake.

For those interested in the unique legal issues surrounding the licensing of spatial data, I recommend you check out the following discussion associated with the OpenStreetMap Project: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Legal_FAQ.

Most of the contributors are spatial data users, rather than lawyers, so it is very practical. The questions and discussion focus primarily on issues associated with the licensing of open spatial data. However, many of the issues, such as copyright, what constitutes a derivative product, and the combining of spatial data from various providers. are prevalent throughout the industry.

http://www.directionsmag.com/article.php?article_id=2701 is a link to a piece by Bruce Joffe on a California assemblyman's attempt to define "computer mapping systems" for purposes of excluded items for disclosure under the state's Public Records Act. Bruce does not agree with the assemblyman's approach.

http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2008/03/pentagon_did_not_ban_google_earth.html is a link to a Google Earth posting about Google's Street View photos of defense facilities and the Department of Defenses reaction. Given the rapid changes in spatial technology and the growth of the industry, these type of situations are bound to occur. However, it appears based upon these accounts that both Google and the Department of Defense reacted appropriately and reasonably.

Many spatial products and services include public sector spatial data. Therefore, even though I have not yet read it, I wanted to pass on this report prepared by the Institute for Information Law at the University of Amsterdam, because I think the licensing of public sector data is an important one in spatial law. Let me know your thoughts. http://www.epsiplus.net/news/ccl_for_psi