Thanks Lester,
In the whole I would agree. I would say if you were some how
transforming and presenting that data in a unique xml based way then
the process "could" be licensable. But if you are talking about the
data that was converted to xml from a public sponsored source as you
described then I am in total agreement with you. Thanks for exposing
me to an issue I hadn't actually encountered before.
It raises some interesting issues for the Service Oriented
Architecture Movement as well.

Cheers !
<b2/>

--- In Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com, Lester Caine <lester@l...>
wrote:

> bruce_bacheller wrote:
>
> > So Lester it's the private companies that are putting the 'tax" on XML
> > data exchange because they have in some way enhanced it ?
>
> They claim to be enhancing it. The enhancements are not needed for the
> main job, for example identifying a property, but you have to pay for
> the bells and whistles just to get hold of the public domain grunt -
> because they have 'bought the rights to distribute it'. The public
> domain stuff is not currently being made available, only via third

party

> 'suppliers'.
>
> > Are they doing any value added services like transformation or
> > mapping or are they just gouging for some xml bits ?
>
> A better example would be another software patent. They 'thought of it
> first' and so claim copyright on it, even though the real

'invention' is

> public domain. There is no problem my taking a customers data, and
> transforming it to the correct eGov defined structure, which is what we
> do, but then I have to prove that we started from existing data,

because

> a lot of the 'proprietary' stuff is also posted round with licences
> attached.
>
> Helen's comment was that someone had to key the information in. I am
> just saying that the keying has already been done and paid for, so
> government offices and local councils shouldn't have to pay for it
> again. We can work with what they ( and WE ) have already paid for.

It's

> a bit like taking the list of country codes, and then charging for it
> 'because you had to copy it from another machine'. Your time should be
> paid for, but not annual licences to carry on using data that was not
> yours in the first place. Creating an XML version of that data should
> not be a licensable activity.
>
> --
> Lester Caine
> -----------------------------
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services