If no restrictive grants apply to geo data, then owners of such IP have a clear choice: If they wish to retain ownership (and exclusive control) over their IP then plainly, they should not publish it. If they publish it, it can only be to convey ownership (and collective control) of their IP to the public. If they consider their IP valuable then I'd suggest they obtain payment before publication/transferring ownership.
NB IP needs no grants except the fundamental right to privacy. The public is interested in encouraging the publication of such IP, hence patents, copyrights, etc. Copyright is no longer much encouragement. The cart before the horse is when owners of IP claim such encouragement as a right, and that when it ceases in efficacy, must be compensated. Au contraire. If copyright is no longer sufficiently encouraging, don't bloody publish. Invite instead, purchase of your IP, like any other merchant interested in realising the value of their property. I'm afraid the only way you're going to re-assert the relationship between private entities and the public, is to facilitate public collaboration in this assertion. The public must assert their ownership of the IP that is published to them, or purchased by them. Unless of course, you can miraculously persuade the representatives of the people to return to representing them rather than their corporate paymasters. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-rms%40gnu.org%3A-A-suggestion-for-publicgeodata.org--t1436700.html#a3879596 Sent from the okfn.org - geo-discuss forum at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ geo-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/geo-discuss
