OrangeCounty Amicus - Revision history

Wiki-Mpg: added conclusion of course

2013-08-01T22:18:29Z

added conclusion of course

Wiki-Mpg: /* Court Documents */

2012-03-13T02:12:05Z

Court Documents

Wiki-Mpg at 19:08, 11 February 2012

2012-02-11T19:08:11Z

Neteler: +cats

2012-01-21T20:40:32Z

+cats

Wiki-Mpg: /* Introduction */

2012-01-21T20:09:58Z

Introduction

Wiki-Mpg: /* Summary of the Case */

2011-12-27T00:13:16Z

Summary of the Case

Wiki-Mpg at 00:04, 27 December 2011

2011-12-27T00:04:58Z

Wiki-Mpg at 21:34, 21 December 2011

2011-12-21T21:34:56Z

Wiki-Mpg at 21:33, 21 December 2011

2011-12-21T21:33:42Z

Wiki-Mpg at 21:10, 21 December 2011

2011-12-21T21:10:27Z

@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
 ** (F) [http://nsgic.org/public_resources/NSGIC_Data_Sharing_Guidelines_120211_Final.pdf "Data Sharing Guidelines" document by NSGIC (National States Geographic Council)]
 ** (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.
 For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html
 = Resolution =
 At the face to face meeting on 4 Feb 2012, the OSGeo board officially endorsed Bruce's letter; mpg sent a formal endorsement letter to Bruce on 11 Feb 2012.
 [[Category: Board]]
 [[Category: Letters of Support]]

@@ Line 55: / Line 55: @@
 ** (H) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCvOC%20-%20SC%20Opening%20Brief.pdf Sierra Club's Opening Brief on the Merits]
 ** (I) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCvOC%20-%20SC%20Answer%20on%20Merits.pdf Orange County's Answer Brief on the Merits]
 * '''Earlier petition to the California Supreme Court to review the case'''
@@ Line 62: / Line 64: @@
 * '''Amicus briefs to the Appeals Court'''
-** (D) Amicus Brief by Bruce Joffe, in support of The Sierra Club '''(no link yet)'''
+** (D) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/GISAmicus.pdf Amicus Brief by Bruce Joffe et al, in support of The Sierra Club]
 ** (E) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/LccCsacAmicus.pdf Amicus Brief of League of Cal. Cities and Cal. State Assoc. of Counties, in Support of Orange County]
@@ Line 70: / Line 72: @@
 For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html
 = Resolution =

@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
 For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html
 [[Category: Board]]
 [[Category: Letters of Support]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:40, 21 January 2012
Line 69:		Line 69:
	** (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.		** (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.

−	For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html.	+	For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html
		+
		+	[[Category: Board]]
		+	[[Category: Letters of Support]]

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 OSGeo has been asked to sign an amicus ("friend of the court") brief for an open data court case in California.
 Dan Putler wrote the following on osgeo-discuss on 16 Dec 2011:
 ''I've been in contact with Bruce Joffe who has been working on an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief associated with two court decisions that have gone in completely opposite directions in California, one involving Santa Clara County and the other involving Orange County. The legal point is the same in both cases, is GIS data (parcel data in particular) data or is it software? If it is data, then it is covered under the California Public Records Act, requiring that it be released to the public for reproduction costs, if it is software, it isn't covered, and is subject to licensing fees. The judge in the Santa Clara County case (correctly) determined it was data, while the judge in the Orange County case (incorrectly) determined it was software. The case is now heading to the California Supreme Court, and Bruce Joffe is rounding up potential individuals and organizations to sign on to the amicus curiae brief. More details about the situation was posted on the Directions Magazine daily newsletter on Wednesday. Here is the link to the article: http://www.directionsmag.com/articles/sierra-club-vs-orange-county-pra-lawsuit-update-december-10-2011/219926''
 The process for getting Board approval is documented here: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Protocol_for_requesting_letter_of_support.
 = Summary of the Case =

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 = Summary of the Case =
 Orange County, California ("OC") has a database of parcel map information.  The Sierra Club ("SC"), acting under the Public Records Act (PRA) of California, requested a copy of the database.  Under the PRA, the data should be provided for a nominal fee (cost of duplication) and without any licensing restrictions.  Orange County refused to provide a copy under those terms, requiring instead a payment of $375,000 and a restricted license, on the grounds that the PRA does not extend to the GIS data in question.  OC offered to provide PDFs of the original source data for the parcel map under the PRA terms, but not the GIS database.  SC brought the issue to court to compel the release of the data in its current, GIS-enabled format.
@@ Line 33: / Line 35: @@
 (We also note that the PRA provides for exemptions to public release where the data in question may violate privacy laws or raise security concerns.  OC is not claiming either of those two exemptions in this case, however.)
 = Relevance to OSGeo =

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-OSGeo has been asked to sign an amicus brief for an open data court case in California.
+= Introduction =
 Dan Putler wrote the following on osgeo-discuss on 16 Dec 2011:
@@ Line 9: / Line 11: @@
 The process for getting Board approval is documented here: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Protocol_for_requesting_letter_of_support.
 ----
 The following documents provide a good summary of (both sides of) the issue:
-* '''Supreme Court petitions'''
+* '''Current briefs to the California Supreme Court on the merits of the case'''
 ** (A) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCPetReviewSCvOC.pdf Petition to Supreme Court, by The Sierra Club]
 ** (B) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCvOCSCPetitionAnswer.pdf Answer to petition, by Orange County]
 ** (C) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCvOCReviewPetitionReply.pdf Reply to the Answer, by The Sierra Club]
-* '''Appeals Court briefs'''
+* '''Amicus briefs to the Appeals Court'''
 ** (D) Amicus Brief by Bruce Joffe, in support of The Sierra Club '''(no link yet)'''
 ** (E) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/LccCsacAmicus.pdf Amicus Brief of League of Cal. Cities and Cal. State Assoc. of Counties, in Support of Orange County]
-* (F) [http://nsgic.org/public_resources/NSGIC_Data_Sharing_Guidelines_120211_Final.pdf "Data Sharing Guidelines" document by NSGIC (National States Geographic Council)]
+* '''Other supporting/relevant documents'''
+** (F) [http://nsgic.org/public_resources/NSGIC_Data_Sharing_Guidelines_120211_Final.pdf "Data Sharing Guidelines" document by NSGIC (National States Geographic Council)]
-* (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.
+** (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.
 For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html.

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 * Supreme Court Briefs on Merits
-** (H) [[File:OC-amicus-BriefOnMerits.pdf|Brief to Supreme Court, by Sierra Club]]  '''link broken, file too large'''
+** (H) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCvOC%20-%20SC%20Opening%20Brief.pdf Sierra Club's Opening Brief on the Merits]
-** (I) [[File:OC-amicus-AnswerOnMerits.pdf | Answer to Brief on Merits, by Orange County]]
+** (I) [http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/SCvOC%20-%20SC%20Answer%20on%20Merits.pdf Orange County's Answer Brief on the Merits]
 For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:10, 21 December 2011
Line 26:		Line 26:
	* (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.		* (G) [http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/pdfs/04-1105.pdf California Attorney General's opinion] on the matter requested by the state legislature at the time of the original Santa Clara County case.

		+	* Supreme Court Briefs on Merits
		+	** (H) [[File:OC-amicus-BriefOnMerits.pdf\|Brief to Supreme Court, by Sierra Club]] '''link broken, file too large'''
		+	** (I) [[File:OC-amicus-AnswerOnMerits.pdf \| Answer to Brief on Merits, by Orange County]]

	For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html.		For further reading, previous filings and briefs are archived at http://www.calpubrec.org/oclawsuit/appeal/index.html.