Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New York MTA Asserts Copyright Over Schedule

Posted by timothy on from the might-be-a-bargain-if-they-always-kept-the-schedule dept.

Presto Vivace writes "Greater Greater Washington reports that 'The New York Metropolitan Transit Authority's lawyers are going after a local blogger, and attempting to block an iPhone application showing Metro-North railroad schedules. The blog StationStops writes about Metro-North Commuter Railroad service north of New York City, and often criticizes its operations. Its creator, Chris Schoenfeld, also created an iPhone application to give Metro-North riders schedule information. Now the MTA is insisting he pay them to license the data, and at one point even accused the site of pretending to be an official MTA site.' I can't believe that this the MTA's actions are going to go over well with the public."

75 of 395 comments (clear)

  1. Re:words words by Desler · · Score: 3, Funny

    What? You expected that this the editor proofread the submission?

  2. This is will never fly in the courts by Cutie+Pi · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is significant precedent in copyright law that lists of facts or data cannot be copyrighted.

    See, e.g. Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991)
    Link

    1. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Jurily · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to mention stupid. It's their own best interest to make that information as widely available as possible.

    2. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by UncleFluffy · · Score: 5, Funny

      There is significant precedent in copyright law that lists of facts or data cannot be copyrighted.

      You're assuming that the schedule is a list of facts, as opposed to a work of fantasy. My experience with public transport in the US is that it's generally the latter.

      --

      What would Lemmy do?

    3. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by DutchSter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not to mention stupid. It's their own best interest to make that information as widely available as possible.

      Not that I agree with what the MTA is doing, but I can see where they might be coming from, if for no other reason from an accuracy standpoint. I'm sure they wouldn't disagree that it is in their best interest to make the information as widely available as possible. However, you'll note that it says that Schoenfeld enters the data manually. What happens when he has a typo or transcribes a column wrong and borks an entire train? Customers get angry because they miss expected connections and blame MTA not Schoenfeld.

      Of course they've got other issues where they've supposedly got a deal with some vendor to provide some kind of mobile scheduling service, but I wonder most about the liability MTA could face if people rely on someone's home grown hobby and it goes bad. Sure in the end they'd come out OK, but there'd be lots of bad press and time spent cleaning up the mess.

      As one of the posters to the blog pointed out copyright law isn't the proper way to go about this objective. Sadly it's probably just the first thing that came to mind when Director Somensmuck called Legal and said "Johnson? We've got a problem. I want to know what you're going to do about it before you go home tonight."

    4. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Translation+Error · · Score: 2, Informative

      I imagine they believe it's in their own best interest to create and sell an iPhone application themselves or (more likely) somehow get a cut from his.

      --
      When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
    5. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wonder most about the liability MTA could face if people rely on someone's home grown hobby and it goes bad.

      How about the liability anyone faces for 3rd-party actions not under their control (hint - there is none).

      A simple disclaimer would suffice - even one written in Engrish, like the "Do not iron clothes while wearing them" on irons.

    6. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by richardkelleher · · Score: 5, Funny

      They are afraid terrorists will get a hold of the schedule and to keep that from happening they are going to stealth the whole process. Buses and trains will now be randomized. Numbers and routes will change spontaneously. Sometimes trains will run on bus routes and buses on train routes. Every once in a while one (either a train or bus) will cross over to NJ, drive off in the pine barrens on its own and self destruct on the off chance it is carrying a terrorist. That will solve everything.

    7. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Jurily · · Score: 3, Informative

      What happens when he has a typo or transcribes a column wrong and borks an entire train? Customers get angry because they miss expected connections and blame MTA not Schoenfeld.

      This is bullshit. When they arrive at the station and their train is not there, usually they'll ask someone working there or start to complain to someone working there, at which point they'll get informed about the facts of life.

      The problem is, a third party service is required to spread the information. In the UK, there are at least 10 different websites, where you can search, book and print anything you could possibly need (including a bus service or a taxi at the destination), and if you're on the move already, you can just send an SMS, and they'll text you back with the information you need.

    8. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't they already do that?

    9. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, you're thinking of the federal government, and even then it's not quite what you think it is. Unless the government of the state of New York has a law whereby it disclaims copyrights in works it creates, it has federal copyrights in them. This having been said, it would probably be good for the Copyright Act to make all governmental bodies ineligible for copyright, on the grounds that it's no incentive to them. For example, the MTA's decisions regarding creating and publishing a schedule are going to be made without any concern for copyright. It isn't incentivized to do what it otherwise would not do because of copyright.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    10. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by pdabbadabba · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, business as usual then?

      --
      caritj.org
    11. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by DutchSter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is bullshit. When they arrive at the station and their train is not there, usually they'll ask someone working there or start to complain to someone working there, at which point they'll get informed about the facts of life.

      You've obviously never been in a public facing position with an angry New Yorker who's Tom Tom is telling them to go down a road that's closed either. Why should they require their staff to put up with rude and aggressive asshats when the situation is caused by something totally out of their control? Particularly if a guy is pointing to a train schedule on his little computer. Do we honestly expect the average station worker to understand that the schedule on the little computer is someone's hobby? It's hard enough to get one of them to tell you where the public toilets are.

      The problem is, a third party service is required to spread the information. In the UK, there are at least 10 different websites, where you can search, book and print anything you could possibly need (including a bus service or a taxi at the destination), and if you're on the move already, you can just send an SMS, and they'll text you back with the information you need.

      Yes I know...I've been there done that. I don't know how all of those systems play together but I'd be willing to bet that they are not dependent on some well meaning guy sitting down with a copy of the schedule keying in timetables by hand. Chance are there is an official API or some other way for all the third parties to grab the data directly which cuts the risk of human error down significantly. In an ideal world MTA would come up with a way to accommodate what is obviously a public demand for the information.

      Again I don't agree with what MTA's doing, but this is the only place where I think they might have a legitimate concern. It does not justify horrid abuses of copyright law however.

    12. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not on grounds of inelligibility for copyright as an entity that this will be thrown out (you're right about that, the gov can hold copyright), it's on the grounds that facts cannot be copyrighted. They may have a case for the composition of the schedule, but as far as the dates, times, and train numbers, they've got nothing. So unless he's doing a scan-paste operation to get the schedules on his app (which I can't imagine, but it's possible), he's in the clear. They're just trying to bully him.

      If I were him I'd counter-sue on the basis of a frivolous lawsuit and harassment, and seek damages matching any lawyer fees and lost income due to the trial.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    13. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Fnord · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you're referring to the subway, not Metro North, then no, there isn't a schedule. Trains run every 8 minutes. If they were to try and make a schedule with 8 minute intervals, any delays (which are inevitable, its a huge system) would quickly throw that out of what completely. Instead of late trains waiting for the next 8 minute interval, they just leave as soon as they can. New Yorkers know that if you miss a train, the next one isn't that far off.

      If you are talking about Metro North like they were in the article, then you weren't looking hard enough. Grand Central has big lit up boards with all the schedules, and pampheletes all over the place. Those trains run once an hour. There a schedule is necessary. With the subway, not so much.

    14. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't follow. Having the info available would increase ridership. How is that in the MTA's interest? Its going to make the trains run slower. How can you expect them to keep schedules if the blasted riders keep getting on and off.

      --
      Squirrel!
    15. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Informative

      Another reason these schedules are not copyrightable is because the MTA is owned by the NY government, and the NY government is owned/funded by the People, therefore the schedules belong to the citizens of New York State. They are free to copy the schedules as often as they desire, especially since they already paid for them via taxation.

      This is just yet another case of government forgetting why it exists - to serve us.

      All legitimate power flows from the bottom, up, and politicians which forget this need to be fired & replaced.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    16. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >>>Why should they require their staff to put up with rude and aggressive asshats

      Because that's what they are paid to do. Just the same as when I worked for JCPenney years ago, I was required to put-up with angry customers complaining about broken products, or late fees on credit cards, or whatever. It's called customer service, and you are expected to be patient with the customer, whether he's happy or angry.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    17. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by badasscat · · Score: 5, Informative

      Another reason these schedules are not copyrightable is because the MTA is owned by the NY government, and the NY government is owned/funded by the People, therefore the schedules belong to the citizens of New York State.

      Authorities are not "owned" by the NY government. This is one of the big issues with authorities in New York - they were invented precisely because they are independent of state government (they're designed as a workaround for various inconvenient state laws). The state has no direct control over the MTA or any other authority, and the authority's finances are intentionally kept separate. For all intents and purposes, authorities are simply very large non-profit organizations that have been granted broad powers by the state to provide public services, and have governing boards comprised of state and local officials, among others.

      Some authorities are actually completely financially independent; they're not subsidized at all. The MTA is not in that category, but it does make more of its own money than any other transit system in the world. Its subsidy is relatively small in percentage terms, and it is not direct government funding, like an agency. It's an agreement that needs to be negotiated and renewed every few years.

      I'm not disagreeing that this stuff can't be copyrighted, I'm just saying it's not for the reason you provided. There's no direct link between any NY authority and the taxpayer. There are indirect links, but it's not an unbroken chain between authority and taxpayer.

    18. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by syousef · · Score: 2

      You've obviously never been in a public facing position with an angry New Yorker who's Tom Tom is telling them to go down a road that's closed either. Why should they require their staff to put up with rude and aggressive asshats when the situation is caused by something totally out of their control?

      Because it's public transport, not a gentleman's carriage service. If the public are rude and aggressive enough, you call the police in.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    19. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by mi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, it takes government money, but more in the way that Blackwater takes government money than the way the US Army takes government money.

      Except Blackwater faces real competition (from similar outfits world-wide), while MTA is enjoying government-like monopoly power over millions of people.

      In a parallel sub-thread I argue, that benefits of having a single outfit run the "natural monopoly" is dwarfed by the losses from stupidity, complacency, and outright corruption, that inevitably befall such outfits.

      One only needs to recall AT&T, and what it did with its monopoly on "long-distance" phone service... But, at least, AT&T was profitable...

      The bridge and tunnel authority, which is actually now owned by the MTA, has always been profitable

      Their ability to raise tolls at whim surely helps. In Massachusetts, the toll-collector's salary can reach $90K. In New York it is very good money as well — for a job, that requires nothing, but high school diploma. Why does it have to be a cushy union-backed position, rather than something like burger-flipping, that a youngster (or someone down on their luck temporarily) can always count on? It does not have to be this way, of course, but it is, because MTA need not compete with anybody (unlike burger-chains)...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    20. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by pjt33 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure they wouldn't disagree that it is in their best interest to make the information as widely available as possible. However, you'll note that it says that Schoenfeld enters the data manually.

      There is a simple solution here, which I'm sure everyone on Slashdot has already spotted. OTOH paying a lawyer vast sums of money to sue people is easier than paying a programmer moderate sums to add a formatted text download to their website.

    21. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Alright.

      Well since MTA is a regulated monopoly (like the phone and electric companies) one could argue that in exchange for being granted that monopoly by the State, they are obligated to provide schedules free of charge and without copyright. Else, their monopoly will be revoked, and the monopoly given to someone else to operate, like Conrail.

      This is the same argument used to force Comcast, Cox, and other cable monopolies to provide free CSPAN service. "Do as we tell you to do, or else you will lose your exclusive license."

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    22. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by plague3106 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ever think the high ways for collectors are because it IS a tedius mindnumbing job that they'd have a hard time filling and keeping filled without such high pay? Temporary employees are not great, turnover costs more than having steady employees. Also, with the amount of money collected, you want to be sure these people can be trusted... and that costs money.

    23. Re:This is will never fly in the courts by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

      I don't think granting copyright to a municipality for a train schedule is in any way constitutional. Of course, as Lessig failed at pointing out to the Supreme Court, neither is a limitless copyright term.

      --
      Free Martian Whores!
  3. Disbarment by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The MTA lawyers ought to know that they're persecuting the blogger beyond what copyright law allows. They should be disbarred.

    1. Re:Disbarment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      After being punted around by a lawyer over lots of BS, leading to the loss of my home, its clear to me the bar for disbarment is pretty high.

    2. Re:Disbarment by michaelhood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      DNRTFA but there's no misconduct in sending what amounts to a cease & desist to someone. Anyone can do this, lawyer or not. A C&D is not a court action, it's just a scary looking letter on expensive paper.

      IANAL.

    3. Re:Disbarment by Trepidity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's some level of obvious invalidity past which it can become illegal, if it's coupled with monetary demands (doesn't seem to be the case here). If the sender of the C&D knew or should have known that the claim was frivolous, and demanded monetary settlement, at least one case has held that to constitute criminal extortion.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    4. Re:Disbarment by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (Replying to myself with a bit of historical trivia I remembered.)

      At the risk of a tangent, the ancient Greeks actually had a specific derogatory word for people who brought frivolous suits for the purpose of extorting settlements or intimidating their targets: that's what the word sycophant originally meant (it now means something else, more like "yes-man" or "toady"). And there was a considerable debate at the time over how widespread the problem was, and what sorts of legal reform, sanctions, or prosecution of egregious offenders could do something about it.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    5. Re:Disbarment by WNight · · Score: 3, Funny

      Funny, if you'd shot the lawyer he'd BE disbarred, the state would be paying to house you, and you'd probably still own your house.

      Well, not funny.

  4. Why would a transit company.... by puppetman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    try to stop someone from making their service more user-friendly?

    And the MTA should welcome constructive criticism - it's better than have your customers quietly leave.

    I guess being a created-by-legislature, public-benefit company, run by political appointees means that you don't actually have to server your customers.....

    1. Re:Why would a transit company.... by jmyers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most likely because they have ads on their web page. This guy is stealing from a revenue stream (in their mind).

  5. I thought this was old news... by Animaether · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought this was old news...
    http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/01/089229 ...but I guess that was maps, and this is schedules?

    Damn near the same situation, though, although I'd say the MTA stands less of a chance in this case (raw data) than in that case (if one could argue that the map design, layout, coloring, etc. makes it enough of a unique piece to be able to claim copyright... how -did- that case end anyway?)

    1. Re:I thought this was old news... by langelgjm · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not just precedent - maps were explicitly included in the original Copyright Act of 1790.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
  6. Huh? by sheepweevil · · Score: 2, Funny

    Oh no! Heaven forbid someone knows our train schedule so they can ride our trains! Wait...

  7. not ideal but... by Tim4444 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There is some precedence for preventing private distribution of public material. There was a company in Missouri a few years back charging a large fee to get a copy of freely available documents about your home. Since that was already illegal they got shut down. If it wasn't I suspect you'd end up with so many copy cats that it would eventually be difficult to find the actual government site.

    India has a similar problem with all sorts of fake government offices popping up trying to rip off tourists.

  8. WHO CARES? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't believe that this the MTA's actions are going to go over well with the public.

    Unfortunately, very very few people will ever know about this, and even fewer still will give a shit. The MTA lawyers know this, which isn't to say they care who knows.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  9. Re:Why pay when paper ones are free? by Desler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because it means there is less paper schedules that people just dump into the normal trash?

  10. I thought this was resolved LONG ago by erroneus · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can't copyright "facts." There have been debates and legal wrangling over phone books, schedules and sports statistics over the past 20 years or more to my recollection and every time, the courts decided that "facts" cannot be copyrighted -- only the organization, layout and presentation of the facts can be. All these other things like the blogs and software apps are at the VERY LEAST "derivative works" if anything at all related to the ownership of the data offered up through their original "official" sources.

    And if facts ever become a form of intellectual property, you can pretty much kiss ALL human advancement goodbye. Imagine a world where facts and history are no longer available because some jackass corporation decided not to publish because it's not profitable enough.

    1. Re:I thought this was resolved LONG ago by erroneus · · Score: 2, Informative

      You should really think your argument through. Yes, history books are copyrighted, but the facts they verbalize are not. You or anyone else are able to use the information as reference with which you may create your own history book. Once again, it is the fact that can be copied, not the book.

      As for video game data? I would have to say it depends on the data. If it were scores or other statistical data, I would say "no" it's not copyrightable. On the other hand, if the data in a game is an intrinsic part of the game, then it may be copyrightable.

      But then again, I have a pretty unconventional sensibility when it comes to what I opine should be copyrightable. In my view, software shouldn't be copyrightable at all. Source code, yes. Copyright to your heart's content, but not executable binaries and most certainly not encrypted data. By having binary executables copyrighted, the work is most certainly lost in the future and will never enter public domain the agreement of copyright is supposed to guarantee. As for binary encoded "art" that's fine so long as the format is open and documented. Binary encoded art can be many things including data for game engines to reference such as maps and models as well as images, video and sound. But statistical data should never be copyrightable and so far, I believe the courts have consistently ruled positively to that notion.

  11. copyright length insanity by drDugan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    << steps up >>

    There can be no rational discussion about copyright until people acknowledge
    that current copyright laws, created almost entirely to meet corporate interests,
    are completely out of whack with people's expectations and with any semblance of
    fairness or social good for individuals.

    The current norm is "Life + 70 years" with a comprehensive list here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length

    This means that *NOTHING* created by artists, musicians, or *ANY* of
    the culture created today will move into the public domain in your lifetime
    (expected lifetime) unless the people or companies who control the rights let
    you have access to it through licensing or sales. You will die first before
    the vast majority of today's' culture is available to you legally.

    That is absurd. It is not how the intellectual property system was ever
    intended to work.

    << / steps down off my soapbox >>

    1. Re:copyright length insanity by drDugan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why exactly is this a problem?

      Great question. I don't have a great answer. Not everyone sees the current situation as a problem, which is copyright is the way it is today.

      Here is what I think, and from that, others perhaps will understand why I think the current situation is unreasonable.

      Intellectual property, like property, is a complete social fiction - its a very useful one, but nonetheless - a fiction.

      Property is a big unspoken social agreement we have that assigns resources to individuals and entities and gives them superior rights of control over those resources. This assignment we call "ownership", and is a critical part to nonviolent resource distribution with many independent entities. In civil society it is simply given that this property mapping of things to people/organizations is "real", but in fact it is only supported, like all rules, (both laws and social mores) if people generally agree - both agree that the rules are reasonable, and agree that they each will (in the vast majority) follow those rules. If people don't agree, laws don't work.

      Intellectual property extends the idea of this big shared social mapping of resources (property) to intangible "intellectual" creations (written words, music, video and most anything translatable into computer bits). The basic idea of intellectual property says that if one entity (person, company) did a lot of work in creating something, they should have superior rights to control it for a while. By itself, this is a very reasonable idea.

      On the other hand, there is no physical basis to support property rights on information objects like there are on working land or creating physical things. Many would argue extremely convincingly that in a highly connected world, most people would be much better off if there were no intellectual property at all. That only those large organizations profiting from culture creation and limiting access to culture would be those harmed by eliminating IP entirely.

      However, most important to the debate from my perspective is one of culture. The shared actions of humans that create the beauty, education, entertainment, and everyday existence for human beings is now encoded very often in digital information used to create experiences we all share. The fundamental question at hand is this: are we better off with human experience owned by corporations, or not? To me, this is the essence of the whole copyright debate - it has nothing to do with the specifics of law or legality, the politics of lobbying groups, or even the money people make off IP - it has to do with what kind of entity gets to create and control human culture, and whether it happens primarily by and for individuals in an open way, or whether it happens primarily under corporate ownership in a closed way.

      Currently, we unequivocally have the latter. Large corporations primarily own the most valuable and most widely shared cultural elements in all 1st-world countries. The length of copyright basically only benefits and perpetuates corporations now. Governments with WIPO and other treaties are trying to enforce long, strong copyright protections globally. Its not individuals' creative expression driving how we live, how we think, how we get news and information, how we are entertained, how we are educated - but rather (and I'm being extremely general here) - it is corporations. These statements are extremely broad and there are many counter examples, but I'm referring to the largest factors and the most momentum in society.

      I see it as unreasonable that culture created today will never be available to me openly and legally in my lifetime. The only reason the system works this way is because large companies profit more from IP working this way than other ways. The social fiction of IP is no longer a good deal for the individual in this case. This basic understanding that this legal fiction is no longer a good deal for individuals is why so many people redistribute mus

    2. Re:copyright length insanity by Sabriel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This means that *NOTHING* created by artists, musicians, or *ANY* of the culture created today will move into the public domain in your lifetime (expected lifetime) unless the people or companies who control the rights let you have access to it through licensing or sales.

      Why exactly is this a problem?

      We are shaped by the culture we live in. Would you prefer one based on sharing or selfishness?

  12. MTA has a slam dunk case! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Since they never run on time, the schedules are clearly a work of fiction and therefore covered under copyright laws as such!

    1. Re:MTA has a slam dunk case! by megamerican · · Score: 2, Funny

      A good attorney could argue that it's a list of facts of times to not show up.

      --
      If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
  13. Best part of the article: by SOdhner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The MTA told the Stamford Advocate that without a license, the iPhone application might provide inaccurate information. [...] Ironically, the MTA's proposed agreement refuses to provide reliable data updates.

    I never get tired of listening to the silly reasons people come up with when the *actual* reason is "We hear you're making money off of something. We aren't sure how, but we'd like to be making money off of it instead."

  14. prior art exists by swschrad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    london train schedules were copyrighted in the holmes days, too.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  15. Referendum by copponex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is why we need the power to compel referendums for city or county wide issues, and make sure the heads of all departments can be kicked out at the next yearly election by direct democratic action.

    Get 1% of the population to sign a petition, get your spot on the ballot, and voila! Government officials miraculously stop acting like they own the place. I know they have some similar policies out West, but know of none in the East.

    1. Re:Referendum by Ma8thew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because having referenda for everything has worked out great in California.

  16. Re:Didn't this happen not too long ago.. by e9th · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sydney, Australia.

  17. Re:copyright length insanityKNOCK THEM OFF by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Funny

    This means that *NOTHING* created by artists, musicians, or *ANY* of the culture created today will move into the public domain in your lifetime (expected lifetime) unless the people or companies who control the rights let you have access to it through licensing or sales.

    Time to start knocking off the creative element in our society so that we can get that 70 clock to start ticking.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  18. Jeopardy by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll take copyright for $200, Alex. Copyright is defined as "The legal right granted to an author, composer, playwright, publisher, or distributor to exclusive publication, production, sale, or distribution of a literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic work" What is the MTA schedule? Sorry, that's incorrect.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  19. Calling NYCL by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This sounds like a case for New York Country Lawyer - Defending the innocent and the oppressed against the ungodly weight of the CCI - Combined Copyright Interests! A force for good wherever he goes.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  20. Control of Information is Power by amiga3D · · Score: 2, Interesting

    To allow someone else to utilize this information diminishes the power of the New York MTA. It's really all about control. The more ignorant people are the better off the government and corporations are. Too bad most people choose to be ignorant.

  21. And here I was, thinking that... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...the MTA is owned by the people of New York, and therefore any copyright would mean, that they got the ultimate right... and could maybe even revoke the MTA's right to use it.

    Yay for a "free market". :/

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  22. Never say "never" by jayme0227 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is ample evidence on Slashdot, if you're not too lazy to look,* of armchair lawyers coming up with perfectly reasonable precedents that the courts seemingly refused to cite in their decisions. Just because the precedent is there and seemingly applicable doesn't mean the court will follow it.

    *I am

    --
    But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
  23. *Public* transportation by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Supported in part by public taxes. So, its public data.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  24. Workaround: don't precisely copy. by smellsofbikes · · Score: 3, Funny

    So what if he increments every time listed in the schedule by 1 minute? Then it bears little resemblance to the original text but is still useful. The added plus is that in order to show that his schedule is based on their schedule, they have to violate the DMCA.

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  25. Re:Didn't this happen not too long ago.. by chrome · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that got thrown out of court; rail and bus information is public domain. They're not obligated to provide it in an easily fetchable format, but it's perfectly ok to republish it as long as you make it clear that you're not the original source.

  26. Sure they have a copyright... by lordsid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The metro north transit has a copyright on the schedule they produced, i.e. styling, layout but they cannot copyright the data within it. If he scrapes the data by hand entering or even an automatic reading of the page and produces a new schedule with it it is an original work.

    IANAL, but this my understanding of copyright law.

    I hope he can fight this, perhaps the EFF will step in on his behalf.

    --
    IMAGE VERIFICATION IS EVIL!
  27. let me suggest a small correction by westlake · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You will die first before the vast majority of today's' culture is available to you legally

    There is damn little that isn't available legally.

    It's just that not everything is available for free.

    Entry into the public domain does not guarantee you access to the original - to the master prints or recordings.

    It doesn't give you access to unpublished drafts, storyboards, concept designs, deleted scenes, sets, props, costumes, etc.

    It does not guarantee funding for storage, restoration or distribution.

    1. Re:let me suggest a small correction by tinkerghost · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is damn little that isn't available legally.

      Hmm, off the top of my head:

      • Concert recordings - most concerts are recorded & the recordings are buried unless the tour company decides to make a tour album. Phish & The Greatful Dead being 2 exceptions since they both have publicly stated they want people to bootleg the concerts.
      • Music Recordings from the 20s through the 40s - most don't exist because the masters were thrown away when the music stopped being profitable.
      • Many of the original Dr Who episodes - the BBC destroyed the tapes to make room in the vaults. Many episodes are only caught on bootleg audio recordings from the radio.
      • Out of print books.

      As a point in fact, the Library of Congress has had fights with media companies in the past over trying to transcribe some of their holding to new media.

      Entry into the public domain does not guarantee you access to the original - to the master prints or recordings.

      No but it guarantees the ability to create a copy before the last original is lost. If I have the last copy of a 1918 club recording, I won't be able to make a preservation copy of it until 2038 - since it's 120 years for corporate copyright.

  28. They're doing it wrong by pluther · · Score: 3, Informative
    For an example of how to do it right, take a look at my local transit system, TriMet.

    They publish their data in well-defined formats, including real-time location information for all buses and trains, free for anybody to use.

    Anyone is free to write their own applications using their data. TriMet maintains links to many of them on their web site.

    --
    If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
  29. Public Service by Mike+Rice · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The MTA is supposedly providing a public service in transporting people from one place to another.

    In order for that service to actually be useful, a published schedule is required.

    For that published schedule to be useful it must be Accurate, Timely, Accessible, Sufficient, and Understandable to the great majority of the public.

    If the MTAs published schedule met these minimum requirements, there would be no viable market for third party involvement.

    Since there obviously IS a third party market, it stands to reason that the MTA is not providing one or more of the requirements to be useful, to the public it is supposed to be serving.

    So a third party steps in to provide that service. It's the American way, and I say the MTA should spend more effort making sure their published information is actually useful to their customers.

  30. BART has similar copyright claims by stevew · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thought I would take a look at the local transit system and see if they had similar restrictions.

    http://www.bart.gov/siteinfo/copyright.aspx

    Sure seems like it!

    "Copyright
      All content on the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) website (http://www.bart.gov) including the collection, arrangement, assembly and presentation of pages and all logos, maps, text, images, feeds and databases are the property of BART or its content suppliers and are protected by copyright laws.

    You may not use the BART logo, the BART map or any other content from the BART website without express written permission in advance from BART."

    --
    Have you compiled your kernel today??
    1. Re:BART has similar copyright claims by apenzott · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One hand taketh, another hand giveth.
      http://www.bart.gov/developers/
      It appears that BART has said to the scrapers; "Here is the data you need in raw form along with some suggested tools you can integrate our schedules into your applications."
      On the whole, it looks like BART has embraced these applications rather than raise a stink on them.

      --
      The Roman Rule: The one who says it cannot be done shall not interrupt the one who is doing it.
  31. Everywhere you go these days by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whiney pusses and crybabies. "Oh, I missed the train by a minute and a half, now I'll have to wait for FIFTEEN MINUTES for the next train!!"

    Oh boo hoo. He should have pulled his pecker out of - wherever - a few minutes earlier, so that he could have some TIME to catch the train. If his source of information was faulty, well, he had an opportunity to use another source. Why didn't he pick up a dead-tree version of the schedule last month? Finally, I'm forced to ask - who gives a damn if this inept dilrod is late for some stupid appointment, anyway? He's been riding trains most of his life, and hasn't figured out how things work yet? Screw him.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  32. Re:Didn't this happen not too long ago.. by Zordak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    rail and bus information is public domain.

    Even more than that, information is in the public domain. You cannot copyright the fact that a particular train is supposed to arrive at a particular stop at a particular time. You may be able to copyright your layout of your brochure, and the nifty graphics you put all over it, but there is no creative expression to the fact of a bus schedule.

    And still more, is convenience and efficiency so anathema to government that they feel the need to stamp it out wherever they see it, even if it's not costing them anything? Have they considered that maybe MORE people will ride the rail system if they have schedules conveniently accessible?

    --

    Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  33. Re:Didn't this happen not too long ago.. by X0563511 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the problem that they have, is a loss of control over the information.

    If something goes wrong, intentional or otherwise, and the schedule that all these people look at through the phone is incorrect... who's gonna get the angry customer call? The train company.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  34. Re:Didn't this happen not too long ago.. by wstrucke · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think the problem that they have, is a loss of control over the information.

    If something goes wrong, intentional or otherwise, and the schedule that all these people look at through the phone is incorrect... who's gonna get the angry customer call? The train company.

    That's the first thing I've read here that actually makes any sense as to why the MTA would be doing this, though I adamantly disagree. As was previously stated, this is the city transit authority -- by definition a public entity. They have no business doing anything with copyright, nevermind suing a tax payer for using the information!

    This is almost as bad as the news that the tax payer "bailed out" banks are raking in record profits by increasing overdraft and other fees -- talk about biting the hand that feeds you...

  35. Holy Hell! by celtic_hackr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hate PC comments like yours. It should not be anyone's responsibility to warn blazing fools not to put steaming hot coffee in their lap and try to drive, or not to iron clothes while wearing them, or that a jar of peanuts contains (wait for it) PEANUTS! Yeah that last one is a real warning message, pick a jar of peanuts and read it for your self. Anyone ignorant enough to not know that a jar of peanuts contains peanuts needs a lifetime treatment at the local electrical shock therapy center.
    I am so tired of this "label anything because someone might sue you for them being an idiot" fad. It should be an affirmative defense of anyone that you are not responsible for other people being too stupid to live. Maybe that was your point. I hope so.

  36. Re:Didn't this happen not too long ago.. by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But this isn't Germany. I don't know what Germany's copyright law says about it, but in the US you can't copyright data -- only its representation. Douglas Adams coupd copyright HHGTG, but he could't copyright the act of blowing up the earth, or putting a fish in your ear to translate.

    In the US, you can't copyright a phone book, OR a bus schedule. This is the most absurd thing I've heard of all week, and it's Friday.

    --
    Free Martian Whores!
  37. Yes, maintaining control of the data IS important by DVARP · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I won't comment on the legalities of copyright (IANAL) or the tactics MTA is using (they may have shot themselves in the foot), but there are very good reasons for MTA to want to keep control of their schedule information and limit third-party distribution.

    Yes, third parties can often get information out to the public in a faster and more accessible manner than transportation companies, but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it. I should know--I was responsible for the project that first put Amtrak schedules online, back in the Gopher era and then in the early years of the WWW. We also did online schedules for several commuter rail systems, including MTA's, in those early years.

    Most important _is_ ensuring that the data is maintained and kept up to date. Having outdated schedules up for download is worse than having no schedules at all. This is not a matter of 'boo hoo, you missed the train by one minute because you were relying on your iPhone--be early next time' as one commenter put it: sometimes the changes can be pretty substantial, especially as a result of construction projects. And yes, the company gets blamed even when the fault is someone else's.

    Second, it is _not_ helpful to undercut the system's own communications department. They may not be as fast as you in putting out an app, but they may have something much more useful in process, such as an app that can link to a dispatching database and provide real-time departure information (see NJ Transit's new Departure Vision beta, for example). With all due respect to your programming skill and interface design ideas, users are usually better off with information direct from the source.

    Finally, put yourself in the shoes of the system. When we were distributing a downloadable version of Amtrak's timetable, we had a pretty difficult time trying to convince well-meaning individuals not to repost them on their own boards, and getting the ones who had done so to take down outdated editions. They may be dealing with other people who want to do the same thing as you, and all of this at the same time as they're trying to add new features to the official sites.

    If you want to do something like this, either as a public service or for profit, the right thing to do is to communicate with the system and get their permission first. Ranting on Slashdot about copyright, government bureaucracies or about the lousy on-time performance of the system's operating side (actually, Metro-North's on-time performance is exemplary--best in the nation) is not constructive. Find out what is in the pipeline, and if you still think there's a need for the kind of information you can provide or the mechanism for delivering it, make the case to the system's customer service people, and you'll probably get a green light and a good deal of cooperation.

    Matt Mitchell
    Delaware Valley Association of Rail Passengers
    www.dvarp.org

  38. obvious peanuthood by epine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah that last one is a real warning message, pick a jar of peanuts and read it for your self. Anyone ignorant enough to not know that a jar of peanuts contains peanuts needs a lifetime treatment at the local electrical shock therapy center.

    There are so many things wrong with this sentiment, from an engineering perspective, I hardly know where to begin. This flies in the face of almost everything we've learned about software development in over the last thirty years. But I'm posting belatedly, so I won't belabour the point.

    1. common sense is not common
    2. use case blindness: not everyone is standing in a brightly lit retail store, carefully contemplating the interior contents of each individual bottle, with a full slate of ordinary human senses
    3. deniability in the edge case (we thought it was just as obvious with these sugar frosted chocolate coated peanut clusters as with the plain roast peanuts, so we didn't put the label on the bottle)
    4. adding complexity to little advantage

    I just love reading code with lots of condition logic to handle errors were no useful recovery is possible.

    Simple: if it has peanuts, label it as containing peanuts

    Complex: if it has peanuts, label it as containing peanuts, unless the product is obviously peanuts, and in case the interpretation of obvious ever needs to be litigated, here's fifty pages of criteria to legally define "obvious peanuthood".

    Yeah, sure, let's reformulate the entire legal system so we can indulge in brief orgasms of self-satisfaction when the lazy idiot next to us does himself avoidable harm and wails in primal dismay. Let me tell you, I enjoy watching lazy idiots get their comeuppance. There's no greater joy in life than watching some stupid fool attempt to weave his way through heavy congestion with a series of phone-booth lane changes, on reflex and attitude and no anticipation, only to find himself mired at the center of dead stop while everyone he nipped around crawls slowly past in the next lane.

    But I don't go around advocating catastrophically stupid engineering practise to enshrine comeuppance as a constitutional virtue.