On 09/01/2011 13:47, Adam McGreggor wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:53:19AM +0200, Stefan Magdalinski wrote:
Ask forgiveness, not permission.
If Gov won't release/change the way judgments are released, and there
is a source of info available, it may be worth shaking the tree a bit.
Well, I've decided to try asking permission, at least to begin with (and
noting that there are others following alternative routes, and it seems
pointless to duplicate efforts in that respect).
I started by asking Bailii for permission to copy their data, to which
they predictably responded with "no". But they've also been helpful
enough to point me in the right direction for obtaining the data from
source - or, at least it would have been helpful if their own list of
URLs and email addresses was up to date, which it isn't! I think that
itself demonstrates a fundamental weakness in the idea of giving Baillii
a publishing monopoly, since they seemingly can't be trusted to maintain
the meta-data associated with the material they receive.
So, I did a bit more digging, armed with Bailii's "helpful" information
at least as clues, and I'm now waiting for a response from HM Court
Service to my request. Assuming that they're still unwilling to provide
the data to me, my intention is to keep on trying to escalate it as far
as possible within their organisation, and then when (if) I finally
reach a brick wall to make an FOI request for copies of any internal
memos related to their refusal. Unless, of course, they let me have the
data, in which case I'll stick it on a website and anyone else can have
it too.
Incidentally, the Scottish Court Service does now publish key judgements
on its own website under an Open Government licence. So there's even
less justification for the English and Welsh courts not to do the same.
Mark
--
http://mark.goodge.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
