7 ms·

EFF Wins Protection for Time Zone Database

457 points by taylorbuley 15y ago

mattdeboard 15y ago
I love the apology because it sounds exactly like the apology of a man (or organization) who has had it explained to him exactly what a very very bad position his activities have put him in. Really like seeing a complete apology unlike the "We apologize if we caused any discomfort..." ambivalent BS we see all the time.
- jacques_chester 15y ago
  I've seen those referred to as "Notpologies": http://skepticlawyer.com.au/2012/02/23/the-notpology/ http://skepticlawyer.com.au/2012/02/23/the-notpology/
  - andyjohnson0 15y ago
    Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology
lsb 15y ago
Why is there no penalty? Lawyers wasted a lot of billable hours over a suit filed over a copyright claim on facts. If there's no penalty for such frivolous claims, we'll keep having to fight the same fight, wasting money along the way.
- ggchappell 15y ago
  That's a good question. The article seems to indicate that there was almost a penalty. FTA: > In January, EFF advised Astrolabe that Olson and Eggert would move for sanctions if Astrolabe did not withdraw its complaint. Today's dismissal followed. In other words, the complaint was dropped only after penalties were threatened. Thinking about this issue, I see your point, but I'm not sure how far in that direction we should go. In particular, we don't want to create a mechanism that can easily be used to punish whistle-blowers (for example), simply by finding someone willing to declare their complaint to be frivolous.
  - notatoad 15y ago
    frivolous is one thing, fraudulent is another. they filed a copyright claim on information that not only do they not own, information that it is not possible to own. this sort of behaviour should be punished.
    - marshray 15y ago
      If anyone should be punished, it's the lawyers who enabled them to persist in this course of action. Perhaps basic facts can't be copyrighted, but sometimes collections of facts are given some protection. The telephone directory is a classic example. Given the sincerity of the apology, I think it was a honest mistake and a welcome example of the legal system working the way it should. At least after EFF is on the case. We should go donate to them. Right now.
      - bhickey 15y ago
        You have your example backward. Feist v. Rural held that telephone books are not subject to copyright. Just because something was laborious to compile does not make it copyrightable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
        marshray 15y ago
        Yes, good point.
        carbocation 15y ago
        In the US. In Europe, the law differs. Specifically, 'sweat of the brow', rejected by Feist in the US, is a factor in Europe: http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html#directive http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html#directive
        looperator 15y ago
        Well, many formats of telephone book are copyrightable, particularly the "yellow pages" portions, where selection and arrangement into categories are applied, meeting the "de minimis thought needed to withstand the originality requirement". http://www.copyright.gov/reports/dbase.html http://www.copyright.gov/reports/dbase.html Many other collections of pure fact will meet those criteria as well.
polemic 15y ago
Seems like now would be a good time to: https://supporters.eff.org/join https://supporters.eff.org/join, https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate or https://supporters.eff.org/shop https://supporters.eff.org/shop
- redthrowaway 15y ago
  I pledged my $100 after the SOPA saga. Still waiting on my hat, though...
- jonhendry 15y ago
  True. But to be honest, the apology and climb down were pretty decent too. All too often these things are dragged out and fought tooth and nail, to nobody's benefit but the lawyers. Which is to say, the astrology people seem to be pretty decent folks about it, not SCO-type bipedal hagfish in 3-piece suits, or Rightshaven-style copyright sharks with a business model based on IP lawsuits. If I knew anyone who were into astrology-type things, I think I might order them something from Astrolabe, as a small reward for the good behavior in dropping the suit. Ignoring for a moment the question of whether IP is valid as a concept: if they were misinformed that they had a case, and that their IP had been widely misappropriated without compensation, they probably thought they were in the right. And I'm not sure I can fault them for doing so, given the advice they were likely given. Whoever gave them the bad legal advice might have led them to believe they were on to a legal jackpot. It doesn't seem to be a big, money-spinning operation, so the case might have offered the possibility of a more comfortable old age for these people. A little extra business from appreciative tech types would help lessen the sting.
  - jonknee 15y ago
    > Which is to say, the astrology people seem to be pretty decent folks about it, not SCO-type bipedal hagfish in 3-piece suits, or Rightshaven-style copyright sharks with a business model based on IP lawsuits. > If I knew anyone who were into astrology-type things, I think I might order them something from Astrolabe, as a small reward for the good behavior in dropping the suit. Regardless of stepping down, it was an obviously frivolous suit in the first place. Backing down from BS threats isn't something that should be commended, not ever making them in the first place should be. Who would ever think that time zones are copyrightable and have the cojones to sue over it? An absurd and a waste of everyone's time. Update: I just read the complaint and their attorney uses her Gmail address for official business. What a joke. Go figure that an astrology company has a fly by night attorney filing obviously BS lawsuits.
click170 15y ago
Obviously the lawsuit was a non-starter, any company that realized this would retract the complaint, but I was impressed by the apology. It seems like in every suit I hear about where the company was wrong, they lose the case but still try to say they did nothing wrong and refuse to apologize. I was impressed this company did.
dylanvee 15y ago
Dr. Eggert is a lecturer at UCLA, and a fantastic one at that (not to mention a huge contributor to various GNU projects). This quarter I have the pleasure of taking his Operating Systems class, and last year I got to take Programming Languages taught by him. I'm really happy about this outcome because people like him should never have to have their brilliance tempered by patent trolls.
- gnucarsmell 15y ago
  Long time lurker here. Finally made an account to back up my man Professor Eggert! What an awesome guy and a great teacher. His classes are insanely hard: you cried, you contemplated suicide, then homicide, then you LEARNED... A TON. I wish he would record his lectures and put them up for the world to see. Also I'm glad to see my membership fees being put to good use. Also, "hello world."
  - dylanvee 15y ago
    Excellently put! I've spent so many nights holed up in the library, staring at a dozen lines of some esoteric programming language and cursing UCLA Engineering, but it all turned out to be incredibly valuable and I wouldn't trade it for anything.
Matt_Rose 15y ago
Does this mean that TZ database is back at elsie.nih.gov?
- kijeda 15y ago
  No. The database was already in the process of being transitioned to IANA prior to the lawsuit. The lawsuit just accelerated the transition. It is now at http://www.iana.org/time-zones http://www.iana.org/time-zones
jakejake 15y ago
I'm really glad this has been resolved. Now I just wish there was an easier way to use the database. Have you ever had to code something with timezone awareness..? It's kinda nuts.
- brazzy 15y ago
  I've had to do that in Java and found the API perfectly usable, more so with Joda Time. That may be different for your platform. But what's really nuts is the domain itself, like most where history and politics are involved.
HappyH 15y ago
让他如同
nkassis 15y ago
So that actually raises a question in my mind, does that make all database that don't include something new created by someone (I'm thinking book database, research databases) as non copyrightable? I'm thinking of phone books as an example.
- rmc 15y ago
  I think it depends. I'm pretty sure phone books and street directories are copyrightable. You can get copyright on collections of facts, this is how a phone book is copyrightable.
  - looperator 15y ago
    Actually, you can't copyright all of a phone book. In Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Co. (499 U.S. 340), the Supreme Court said that the "white-pages" part of a phone book had so little application of creativity that it was not copyrightable.
figital 15y ago
Hopefully this is true these days: http://dearrichblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/can-we-republish-sports-statistics.html http://dearrichblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/can-we-republish-sp...
dlitz 15y ago
What's the deal with these "covenants not to sue", lately, and how are they different from actual licenses? My guess is that such covenants would not be binding on third parties who buy the underlying copyright/patent rights, but I don't really know.

457 points by taylorbuley 15y ago

I love the apology because it sounds exactly like the apology of a man (or organization) who has had it explained to him exactly what a very very bad position his activities have put him in. Really like seeing a complete apology unlike the "We apologize if we caused any discomfort..." ambivalent BS we see all the time.

jacques_chester 15y ago
I've seen those referred to as "Notpologies": http://skepticlawyer.com.au/2012/02/23/the-notpology/ http://skepticlawyer.com.au/2012/02/23/the-notpology/
- andyjohnson0 15y ago
  Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology

lsb 15y ago

Why is there no penalty? Lawyers wasted a lot of billable hours over a suit filed over a copyright claim on facts. If there's no penalty for such frivolous claims, we'll keep having to fight the same fight, wasting money along the way.

ggchappell 15y ago
That's a good question. The article seems to indicate that there was almost a penalty. FTA: > In January, EFF advised Astrolabe that Olson and Eggert would move for sanctions if Astrolabe did not withdraw its complaint. Today's dismissal followed. In other words, the complaint was dropped only after penalties were threatened. Thinking about this issue, I see your point, but I'm not sure how far in that direction we should go. In particular, we don't want to create a mechanism that can easily be used to punish whistle-blowers (for example), simply by finding someone willing to declare their complaint to be frivolous.
- notatoad 15y ago
  frivolous is one thing, fraudulent is another. they filed a copyright claim on information that not only do they not own, information that it is not possible to own. this sort of behaviour should be punished.
  - marshray 15y ago
    If anyone should be punished, it's the lawyers who enabled them to persist in this course of action. Perhaps basic facts can't be copyrighted, but sometimes collections of facts are given some protection. The telephone directory is a classic example. Given the sincerity of the apology, I think it was a honest mistake and a welcome example of the legal system working the way it should. At least after EFF is on the case. We should go donate to them. Right now.
    - bhickey 15y ago
      You have your example backward. Feist v. Rural held that telephone books are not subject to copyright. Just because something was laborious to compile does not make it copyrightable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
      - marshray 15y ago
        Yes, good point.
      - carbocation 15y ago
        In the US. In Europe, the law differs. Specifically, 'sweat of the brow', rejected by Feist in the US, is a factor in Europe: http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html#directive http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html#directive
      - looperator 15y ago
        Well, many formats of telephone book are copyrightable, particularly the "yellow pages" portions, where selection and arrangement into categories are applied, meeting the "de minimis thought needed to withstand the originality requirement". http://www.copyright.gov/reports/dbase.html http://www.copyright.gov/reports/dbase.html Many other collections of pure fact will meet those criteria as well.

polemic 15y ago

Seems like now would be a good time to: https://supporters.eff.org/join https://supporters.eff.org/join, https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate or https://supporters.eff.org/shop https://supporters.eff.org/shop

redthrowaway 15y ago
I pledged my $100 after the SOPA saga. Still waiting on my hat, though...
jonhendry 15y ago
True. But to be honest, the apology and climb down were pretty decent too. All too often these things are dragged out and fought tooth and nail, to nobody's benefit but the lawyers. Which is to say, the astrology people seem to be pretty decent folks about it, not SCO-type bipedal hagfish in 3-piece suits, or Rightshaven-style copyright sharks with a business model based on IP lawsuits. If I knew anyone who were into astrology-type things, I think I might order them something from Astrolabe, as a small reward for the good behavior in dropping the suit. Ignoring for a moment the question of whether IP is valid as a concept: if they were misinformed that they had a case, and that their IP had been widely misappropriated without compensation, they probably thought they were in the right. And I'm not sure I can fault them for doing so, given the advice they were likely given. Whoever gave them the bad legal advice might have led them to believe they were on to a legal jackpot. It doesn't seem to be a big, money-spinning operation, so the case might have offered the possibility of a more comfortable old age for these people. A little extra business from appreciative tech types would help lessen the sting.
- jonknee 15y ago
  > Which is to say, the astrology people seem to be pretty decent folks about it, not SCO-type bipedal hagfish in 3-piece suits, or Rightshaven-style copyright sharks with a business model based on IP lawsuits. > If I knew anyone who were into astrology-type things, I think I might order them something from Astrolabe, as a small reward for the good behavior in dropping the suit. Regardless of stepping down, it was an obviously frivolous suit in the first place. Backing down from BS threats isn't something that should be commended, not ever making them in the first place should be. Who would ever think that time zones are copyrightable and have the cojones to sue over it? An absurd and a waste of everyone's time. Update: I just read the complaint and their attorney uses her Gmail address for official business. What a joke. Go figure that an astrology company has a fly by night attorney filing obviously BS lawsuits.

click170 15y ago

Obviously the lawsuit was a non-starter, any company that realized this would retract the complaint, but I was impressed by the apology. It seems like in every suit I hear about where the company was wrong, they lose the case but still try to say they did nothing wrong and refuse to apologize. I was impressed this company did.

dylanvee 15y ago

Dr. Eggert is a lecturer at UCLA, and a fantastic one at that (not to mention a huge contributor to various GNU projects). This quarter I have the pleasure of taking his Operating Systems class, and last year I got to take Programming Languages taught by him. I'm really happy about this outcome because people like him should never have to have their brilliance tempered by patent trolls.

gnucarsmell 15y ago
Long time lurker here. Finally made an account to back up my man Professor Eggert! What an awesome guy and a great teacher. His classes are insanely hard: you cried, you contemplated suicide, then homicide, then you LEARNED... A TON. I wish he would record his lectures and put them up for the world to see. Also I'm glad to see my membership fees being put to good use. Also, "hello world."
- dylanvee 15y ago
  Excellently put! I've spent so many nights holed up in the library, staring at a dozen lines of some esoteric programming language and cursing UCLA Engineering, but it all turned out to be incredibly valuable and I wouldn't trade it for anything.

Matt_Rose 15y ago

Does this mean that TZ database is back at elsie.nih.gov?

kijeda 15y ago
No. The database was already in the process of being transitioned to IANA prior to the lawsuit. The lawsuit just accelerated the transition. It is now at http://www.iana.org/time-zones http://www.iana.org/time-zones

jakejake 15y ago

I'm really glad this has been resolved. Now I just wish there was an easier way to use the database. Have you ever had to code something with timezone awareness..? It's kinda nuts.

brazzy 15y ago
I've had to do that in Java and found the API perfectly usable, more so with Joda Time. That may be different for your platform. But what's really nuts is the domain itself, like most where history and politics are involved.

HappyH 15y ago

让他如同

nkassis 15y ago

So that actually raises a question in my mind, does that make all database that don't include something new created by someone (I'm thinking book database, research databases) as non copyrightable? I'm thinking of phone books as an example.

rmc 15y ago
I think it depends. I'm pretty sure phone books and street directories are copyrightable. You can get copyright on collections of facts, this is how a phone book is copyrightable.
- looperator 15y ago
  Actually, you can't copyright all of a phone book. In Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Co. (499 U.S. 340), the Supreme Court said that the "white-pages" part of a phone book had so little application of creativity that it was not copyrightable.

figital 15y ago

Hopefully this is true these days: http://dearrichblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/can-we-republish-sports-statistics.html http://dearrichblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/can-we-republish-sp...

dlitz 15y ago

What's the deal with these "covenants not to sue", lately, and how are they different from actual licenses? My guess is that such covenants would not be binding on third parties who buy the underlying copyright/patent rights, but I don't really know.