DoD Announces Intent to Cease Distribution of Nav Data

[ErnieAlston 33]

>>Jep being sued is the cause of the steps DoD is preparing>>(not taking, they're just making sure they can take it down>if>>needed)...>>I've seen this said a few times in the last few days, but have>no idea what the source is. The announcement in the federal>register, which is the only official position of the DoD and>NGA, is not the least bit tentative...it says they are>removing the DAFIF from public access on 1 Oct 2005. >>I find myself wondering if this is just a hopeful rumor. >Anyone have a source?>>Regards>>Bob Scott>ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300>Washington, DChttp://www.aviation-forum.com/piloting/DAF...way_360884.htmlPaul T was the first to confirm back in Aug that NGA was considering this move regarding DAFIF and concern about the Jeppesen suit being the primary reason for it.As we know now NGA did actually go through with the plan to enter it into the federal register for comments, etc.This at the moment appears to be more of a contingency plan pending on the result of the Jeppesen suit rather than a done deal.Regards.Ernie.

[Guest wathomas777]

I find this whole argument a bit Ironic. (ok, more than a BIT)>Scenario A:Software author makes freeware, Another person either publishes same freeware without permission, or "God Forbid" it gets published to FSPlanet.Names are called, FSPlanet is called every evil name in the book, and simmers rush to the aid of the "poor developer" who had his freeware either published without his expressed permission, or redistributed in a way he did not approve.Talk about intellectual rights and such abound....Scenario B:Company A gathers Navdata at their own expense. Jeppesen and the DOD license the software. Jeppesen makes money off of it by repackaging the data and charges for it's use, and DOD places the data on its website free of charge for all to download.YET!!!! Where is the OUTRAGE????. This data is PUBLIC and SHOULD be free. IT's our "TAX DOLLARS" at work!!! When the DoD actually mentions that one of the reasons it's pulling this SPECIFIC database is because it contains data that it did not have copyright for, you scream and yell BS!!!Sorry folks but you can't have it both ways.Either intellectual property is intellectual PROPERTY or it is not.Either a software developer has no copyright and all software should be placed in the public domain....OR, the DoD is completely right in pulling data that may in fact violate the copyright of the individuals who gathered it.Jeppesen is currently in a lawsuit over this very thing, and the DoD realizes that should this go against Jeppesen, they could be next. So instead of spending all these "precious" tax dollars going through their database and trying to find out which data they have copyright to, and which data they don't, they are pulling the database from the public, and ensuring that ONLY DoD personel have access to it, IAW wit h the original licensing agreement.Yet from the words fired up in this forum, you'd think the sky is falling.I find it Ironic that the same bunch of simmers will light the torches and sharpen the pitchforks for some two bit no name weenie who has the audacity to sell freeware over e-bay.Yet, by publically publishing it's database, the DoD could be causing "millions" of dollars in damage by making it available for free to the public. Please someone try to explain that for me. Whether or not someone "would" sue DoD over this is irrelevent. Either we a simmers support a person's copyright or we don't. Plain and Simple.

[Guest vas_yan]

Freeware authors enjoy exactly the same intellectual property rights as payware authors. You are not a copyright holder only if you seek monetary reward from other people using your creation. The core of the author's right is to determine whether other people will use his creation, how and when will they use it and how much, if any, they will pay for it. A freeware author who is going to court over someone else receiving money for the work that such author has nominated as free is not seeking his share of the money, but cease of infringement. Compensation may be awarded in the context of injury to business reputation or dilution in the value of the copyright, when such considerations apply (...as always when discussing intellectual property, Gosta, feel free to correct me if I am wrong).In my view there are few similarities between this scenario and the one involving the US DoD. I will refrain from academic discussion on whether a licensee who creates an injuring product, as well as the demand for that product, may control it and profit from it. It may or may not be related to this discussion. What is related, however, is that Air Navigation Data itself (not the charts published by commercial ventures such as Jeppesen) is not subject to copyright, because it is of public nature, just like the air we fly in is a public good. It is not collected by "individuals" it is collected by states. This is also the view of the US Government I believe (naturally I am talking about national Navdata only, used internally). Access to this "raw" data may or may not be restricted by national legislation, or charged. I don't oppose the provision of raw data in a selective manner i.e. only to authorised commercial ventures, or to other states, but I do oppose the imposition of fees by a state, in view of the fact that the "collection" of this data is to a great extent a part of the States' authority-competence-responsibility in respect of the interest and duty thereof to promote free secure and cheap movement to its people (Honestly, I am not a Jep lawyer).A colleague of mine who had considered a similar issue in respect of marine cartography pointed me to this article http://www.spatial.maine.edu/tempe/obloy.html. I find it a comprehensive and objective piece of writing. Take note of the international solution described in Chapter 4 and the "modest" proposal of Chapter 5. To me it looks like the same basis upon which DAFIF is published, even though any such agreement may have only been implied. Kind regards,