Slashdot Mirror
Court Rules GIS Data Can't Be Kept Secret
Silverbear writes "In an update from a Slashdot story posted in January, The Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled that there is not a significant security risk to the town of Greenwich in making its GIS Data available to the public, and therefore must do so. Greenwich had claimed that the data could compromise personal and national security, and was sued under CT Freedom of Information laws. The legal ruling is available."
So, tax information (boundaries and assessments), streets and address ranges, future land-use plans, city/county boundaries, building permits, census data, and waterways information. Yes, obviously all these is sensitive data that needs to be protected from possible terrorists.
Believe me people, if the terrorists wanted to poison the water supply they wouldn't need the GIS data to figure out how to do it. They also probably really don't care about the Census data to figure out population centers (especially in Greenwich). I highly doubt they care about tax information like assessment values and boundaries as Greenwich is all high-cost living for the most part.
GIS data should be freely examinable. We paid for it as taxpayers and even helped to contribute the data (Census) so why shouldn't we be able to access it? In fact, Portland's $900 for the data is too steep. It should be free for non-commercial use IMHO.
Next they'll make it all available but in a ROT-13 CSV file so they can protect it under the DMCA! Blah.
At least the courts knew better this time and ruled in favor of open information that the public paid for.
Geographic Information Systems (I believe)
It's basically maps - elevation, road, land cover, buildings, that sort of stuff.
-dave
http://millionnumbers.com/ - own the number of your dreams
GIS = Geographic Information Systems ... here's a decent writeup from Wikipedia ... basically allows you to analyze data in terms of location and draw inferences from it. So for instance, based on rainfall patterns, you can predict where grass will grow ;-)
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
For those joining us from overseas and parts West, Greenwich, Connecticut is among the more -- what's the word? -- 'tony' of digs. Sort of like a Beverly Hills for the New York glitter- and media-rati who don't like the feel of sand between their toes out in the Hamptons.
I used to work in GIS and the recurring issue was: Information generated using public funds should be made publicly available. In the old days we would provide data so long as they paid for the media and the wages of the staff to generate the area in questiona and the computer operator for cutting the tape.
When I worked for Washington State Department of Natural Resources, they had a formal system for selling their data that included a licensing agreement! Not sure if it was ever challenged in court or how they were able to justify licensing their data.
BTM
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
In some town on Long Island, they copyrighted their GIS data and tried to refuse to supply it under NYS's FOIL (Freedom Of Information Law). They were sued and lost, but .... were allowed to keep their copyright. So now the people who receive the data can only republish it if they don't violate the town's copyright. Blah.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Except, of course, that Greenwich's GIS database probably doesn't have any FEMA data, since FEMA's a Federal Program.
Oh and there's the part where Connecticut's open records act is different than FOIA.
Finally, I kind of doubt that Greenwich's municipal database contains the same kind of detailed information that FEMA's did.
While I'm sure that there's some private data in Greenwich's database, the FOIA commission ordered that certain private information be sanitized.
I think it's perhaps a little premature to "Kiss that goodbye!"
--AC