Well, considering the MTA schedules can be downloaded from their website, didn't even need to file the request ;)
But...if he had requested non-public data, I would make a big wager that he would not hear within the statutory period. In fact, he wouldn't hear at all. The MTA would either a) say it is a volumonous request, giving them a long time to respond 2) deny it on national security/safety grounds. The next step is to appeal to the state public records oversight group (COOG in NY State). That takes time and $$. And the MTA would then argue they don't have to comply as they aren't a public agency. FWIW, lawsuits are the *only* way this will be resolved. And getting/being sued isn't bad in business--it's the cost of doing business. Ian White :: Urban Mapping, Inc 690 Fifth Street Suite 200 :: San Francisco CA 94107 T 415.946.8175 :: F 866.385.8266 :: blog.urbanmapping.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brandon Martin-Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 12:02:40 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: Re: [Geowanking] GIS Data Released--Mayhem Ensues!!!! Because it's on topic, I thought I might pass along an interesting email I got recently from Will of onnyturf.com : Hey Brandon - Just thought you might be interested, my lawyer filed a FOIL request for all schedule data maintained by the MTA yesterday. Should hear back from them in five days or so. At least thats what the law requires. :) Cheers, Will --==-- Stay tuned. -B On 6/14/07, Landon Blake < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Ian, I believe you have to be a member to access the link that you sent. I think talking to this organization would be the most productive way to help. I believe that were involved in supporting the "free access" side of the court case that you mentioned. http://www.opendataconsortiumorg/ The Sunburned Surveyor From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Ian White|Urban Mapping Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 11:36 AM To: geowanking Subject: [Geowanking] GIS Data Released--Mayhem Ensues!!!! some of you saw my talk at where2.x last month ("How Open Is Open?") in which I poked at much of the silliness around restricting access to spatial data on the grounds of national security and privacy. I mentioned the case of Santa Clara Country losing a case to restrict access to parcel data--first because they wanted to sell it for more $$, then because they decided it contained sensitive info. CA Superior Court rejected these silly concerns last month. Now we find the County seeks to appeal the ruling! http://www.mercurynews.com/valley/ci_6137335?nclick_check=1 This drives me mad. I'm talking to the ACLU and EFF but understandably, they have bigger fish to fry. Access to transit data and government-produced GIS data wants to be free and open, but without a precedent-setting case groups will be scared to do battle. Yes, the above is a US issue, but recent events in the UK indicate that the Ordinance Survey isn't on as stable footing as was once thought. If anything, things are worse (by and large) in Europe. Ian White :: Urban Mapping, Inc 690 Fifth Street Suite 200 :: San Francisco CA 94107 T 415.946.8175 :: F 866.385.8266 :: blog.urbanmapping.com Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
