Strikes me they are being unreasonable. Why do they want to prevent people from mapping licenses as an example? What's the logic in that thinking?
Have they for example, sold the copyright already for cash, but because of their real function, they have to publish the information. Nick On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:16 PM, paul perrin <[email protected]> wrote: > Just wanted a straw poll of the assembled wisdom... > I put in an FoI request using whatdotheyknow. The council said the info was > available on their website. The website requires registration and agreement > to a load of additional licensing conditions. > I don't want to register or agree to the additional conditions - limiting > how the information can be used analysed (one screen print at a time, no > extraction of info etc) > I complained to the info commissioners office (that the info wasn't > reasonably available) they have said that FoI doesn't override copyright so > that's tough... > I don't see the limits being imposed by registration as a 'copyright' > agreement - so don't think this applies... > My FoI request >> http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/list_of_licensed_premises > Council licence agreement > > http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1204374 > Am I being unreasonable? is the Information Commissioner right? > Cheers > Paul /)/+) > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list [email protected] > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > -- Nick _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
