This is a summation by David Braverman (from the Olson TZ community) on the case:

http://www.thedailyparker.com/PermaLink ... 8a641.aspx

zoidsoft wrote:This is a summation by David Braverman (from the Olson TZ community) on the case:

http://www.thedailyparker.com/PermaLink ... 8a641.aspx

And a very good one! It really shows the contradiction of Astrolabe's position, how fragile it is, and how badly they perform to harm a community project for which nobody never earned any money from that!

But sadly, astrology and astrologers comes out again harmed from this. Greate service Astrolabe is doing for us all!

ICANN, Inc (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) has just announced that it is taking over management of the Olson Time Zone database:

http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/r ... t11-en.pdf

If now they can create a universal standard for time changes adopted by other governments, maybe that will eliminate zone changes based on politicians seasonally stupid decrees... (Don't mess with the clocks you morons, mess with your schedules instead)!

zoidsoft wrote:ICANN, Inc (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) has just announced that it is taking over management of the Olson Time Zone database:

http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/r ... t11-en.pdf

I'm sure ICANN knows about the lawsuit, so they should have refered to it in their communication, like something about the legality of the tz database has no problem, etc. I will google search for it, however..

Things keep getting worse and worse for Astrolabe's side. What lawyer or astrologer adviced them to do this?! Whoever he was, did not do his job properly..

jventura wrote:I'm sure ICANN knows about the lawsuit, so they should have refered to it in their communication, like something about the legality of the tz database has no problem, etc. I will google search for it, however..

The discussion has been going on for a couple of years now on the tz mailing list as to what to do when Arthur Olson retires from NIH (where to host the FTP, license agreement wording, etc) so this has been in the works for a while.

Robert Elz had this to say about the transition to IANA / ICANN due to Arthur's pending retirement on the tz mailing list:

"Again, all this is just continuing the process started way back in August, 2009. There's no question but that the events of the past week or so have added some impetus to the process, but that's all.

I have been in communication (a little indirect for now, but it is happening) with IANA / ICANN people, who I believe have also had some contact with Arthur. When there is anything more substantial to report, I'll certainly let everyone know."

I've been thinking that maybe Gary just didn't understand (the nature of copyright, etc) what he is doing or he has a lousy lawyer. When Philip I Frankel (my copyright lawyer) submitted my TX forms (registered copyright) back around 2002 or so, he told me that doing so doesn't confirm copyright or the validity of claims. It only establishes the evidence and provides certain legal benefits (such as free prosecution for the first 90 days, higher damage awards, etc) should the issue ever wind up in court and to not sign such a form unless you are sure you are the rightful owner (doing so falsely is copyfraud). It doesn't establish as Gary said:

"The question of whether the material is ?copyrightable?: has already been decided by the U.S. Copyright Office in the affirmative."

The question of whether/what material is copyrightable is decided in court should the issue come up, not by the US Copyright Office. All created works are granted "presumptive" copyright upon creation, registered or not.

IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) which is based in the USA has just uploaded the Olson Time Zone database: http://www.iana.org/time-zones. They are apparently not worried about the nuisance suit brought by Astrolabe, Inc. See: http://my.earthlink.net/article/tec?gui ... ed9d9ba258

In my opinion, Astrolabe has caused considerable damage to the image of the astrological community in the world, by starting an ill advised lawsuit against Olson and Eggert, the maintainers of the tz database.
The use Olson and Eggert have made of previously published timezone history sources, among them the book versions of the ACS International Atlas and American Atlas, has been completely lawful. They have extracted some (few) data elements from a published reference book. As others have already shown on this thread, the data representation in the books is totally different from the tzdata format. Data are not protected by copyright, and even complete data collections are protected only very weakly.
It is worthwhile to study the decision of the US Supreme Court in the case Feist versus Rural (use Google to find it). In very clear words this decision shows how extremely limited copyright protection for facts is.

I am engaged myself in a project to expand the tz database to make it historically complete, in the framework of the free and public tzdata format. Astrologers need open source, complete and free timezone history information. Together with my colleague Dieter Koch I have created and published the Swiss Ephemeris, a library of computer code for highly precise calculations of planetary orbits, houses, asteroids etc. This library is open source and freely available under the GPL (Gnu public license). It is used by about 500 developers of astrological software in the world.

tzdata in its current form covers already complete timezone history for about 80% of the world in the pre-1970 era, and for 100% of the world in the post-1970 era. Since the early 1990ies, the information collected by the tzdata community has been the main source of reliable timezone information. Also the publications by ACS (book atlas and PC atlas) have used tzdata as their source for recent timezone changes.

I am confident that Astrolabe is going to lose this lawsuit and that the work of the community can continue undisturbed. In all likeliness, the case will be dismissed by the court at the first hearing.

PS: I have the highest respect for Thomas G. Shanks, Neil Michelsen and their coworkers for their effort and success in collecting timezone history information. Their collection is a valuable resource for other researchers. But it must be noted that they have collected data which by their very nature are public data. They are data about which time the clocks showed on a given date in a given city. The data were not created by these collectors, they were just picked out from other publications, and possibly a few private letters.

I have much less respect for the current owners of Astrolabe, who recently purchased some rights on the ACS database out of a bankruptcy auction. They have not contributed to the data collection and so far have done nothing to improve it, except adding recent timezone changes picked from the tzdata list - which they now sue.

Alois Treindl

I must admit some of the details of this case are outside my own understanding, but this is turning into an event of widespread media concern. It seems only fair to present Astrolabe's side of the story. The following is a statement released by them which I am also publishing outside the forum on this link:
http://skyscript.co.uk/astrolabe.html

------------------
Astrolabe Press Release on lawsuit
Immediately after filing a copyright violation lawsuit with the U.S District Court for Massachusetts against Mr. Arthur David Olson or Mr. Paul R. Eggert, Astrolabe Inc., received dozens of highly emotional emails, telephone calls, Facebook postings, tweets and inquiries. There have also been attempts to disable its website.

Astrolabe has now done a careful reading of these communications, as well as of the various industry publications that broke this story on October 7.

A typical news story appeared in TheRegister.co.uk under the Headline ?Chaos feared after Unix time-zone database is nuked.? It continued, ?The internet?s authoritative source for time-zone data has been shut down after the volunteer programmer who maintained it was sued for copyright infringement by a maker of astrology software.? It went on to say that the Time Zone and Daylight Saving Time Database, also known as the Olson database, is ?the official reference Unix machines use to set clocks to local time? and that it ?is used by countless websites and applications to reconcile time differences across the world.?

We can well understand the panic caused by such stories. However we believe that the highly emotional reactions that we received were based on an incomplete understanding of the facts. These facts are as follows:

• 1. Astrolabe?s lawsuit is in no way intended to interfere with compilation of current time-zone information maintained by Mssrs. Olson and Eggert, or any other persons. On the contrary, Astrolabe recognizes that compiling current time-change information is crucial for keeping computers properly up to date, as well as for many other useful purposes in today?s world. Astrolabe applauds the efforts of Olson, Eggert and the many other volunteers who maintain the database of current time changes.
  
  2. The aim of Astrolabe?s suit is only to enforce copyright protection for materials regarding historical time data prior to 2000. This does not affect current time-setting on computers, and it has little or no effect on the Unix computing world.
  
  Late in 2010 Astrolabe was disturbed to learn of the compilation effort of Mssrs. Olson and Eggert, which had been going on for a number of years. When asked to what extent they had relied upon the historical data published by ACS Publications, Mssrs. Olson and Eggert gave Astrolabe misleading answers. Further research by Astrolabe revealed that, contrary to the representations of Mssrs. Olson and Eggert, their database contained not just incidental or limited reproduction of the copyrighted material, but wholesale reproduction of the same, without lawful permission, contract or license.
  
  3. The fact is that the historical time zone data compiled by ACS is protected by registered copyrights, first on its publication in book form as the American Atlas and the International Atlas, and later in electronic form as the ACS PC Atlas. The question of whether the material is ?copyrightable?: has already been decided by the U.S. Copyright Office in the affirmative.
  
  4. Why is the material considered copyrightable? Many hold the mistaken belief that all databases are mere compilations of fact, and are therefore not subject to copyright. However, compiling the ACS database went far beyond gathering official government data. In 20th-century America, particularly in the Midwest, time standards were a chaotic patchwork of not only state and local ordinances, but even of different time observances in the same jurisdiction. (For example, in some cases a hospital would record birth times using Standard Time while the surrounding city was on Daylight Time.)
  
  Ferreting out the time standard that was actually being used to record a birth time involved a great deal of ingenuity. Besides researching ?official? records, the publisher and authors consulted a myriad of other records using proprietary methods and, on some occasions, hiring local investigators. Where inconsistencies existed, the publisher and authors used their best judgments and expertise as to the actual time observed in specific locations, based on this historical research. In much the same way as Zagat Survey and Michelin Guide not only set forth the names, addresses and features of particular restaurants, but also various ratings, the Atlases comprise original historical time and location research, including judgments and expertise in determining actual historical time observed in any given location, fully meeting the definition of an ?original work? as required under the Copyright Laws of the United States.
  
  
  5. Why did the ACS compilers bother to undertake this effort? Prior to the widespread use of computers, few except astrologers had any interest in putting together detailed information about the time standards that were actually in use in different geographical areas at various times in history. As every astrologer knows, this information is vital. Without knowing the relation of the local time in use to time at the Greenwich meridian (the standard that is used for astronomical observations), it is impossible to calculate an accurate astrological chart.
  
  Whatever others think of astrology, at the very least the world owes a debt to astrologers for creating this massive record of the time standards used in the past. This is not the place to make a detailed defense of astrology, but in answer to those whose outrage is increased by the fact that astrologers are the plaintiffs, we can only say that these detractors are uninformed. Uncritical recipients of the opinions of those who are higher in status than they are, they have obviously never experienced the power of astrology for themselves. Why astrology works is still a mystery, but as the prevailing paradigm morphs from 19th-century mechanism into one that has to embrace all the new things we are finding out about the universe, perhaps we will soon have a plausible explanation. Anyway, to those who know that astrology is bunkum and its practitioners are money-seeking parasites on society, all we can say is try to be a bit humbler and accept that the universe is far more mysterious than you imagine.
  
  6. Why is Astrolabe suing to defend this copyright? Following the death of Neil Michelsen, the founder of Astro Computing Services, Astrolabe purchased the rights to the ACS PC Atlas, the electronic expression of the time-change database compiled by Michelsen, Thomas Shanks and Mark and Rique Pottenger. The data was also augmented by permission with the work of Doris Chase Doane and Francoise and Michel Gauquelin. In addition, the entire astrological community gave their time and energy to help correct this ongoing work, freely knowing that it was for commercial use.
  
  With this purchase, Astrolabe inherited the obligation to pay royalties on the Atlas to Michelsen?s widow and to the other principal compilers, who are now at retirement-age. Astrolabe is defending this hard-earned intellectual property in order to continue paying royalties and recoup its own investment. Contrary to the accusations that it is trolling for dollars, it is not filing this suit in pursuit of vast amounts of cash. In the astrology world, there are no vast amounts of cash. The suit was filed in order to make Astrolabe?s concerns known to Mssrs. Olson and Eggert having not received a satisfactory reply to earlier phone calls and letters. Astrolabe has no wish to cripple the database on which Unix, Linux, Java and other computing depends.

Conclusion
In filing this suit, Astrolabe has touched the hot buttons on a number of highly emotional issues. One issue is the long-held right of people to receive money for their labors vs. the newer values of open sourcing, wiki and the other forms of the free information exchange that have made the internet so great. Another is the clash of paradigms between a mechanistic one unfriendly to astrology and a newer (and older) one that recognizes that the universe is far more mysterious than we thought. It is painful to be caught in these cross-currents, but we hope that through this suit we will not only gain a just decision, but also promote greater clarity on these important issues.

Deb,

The above was already posted right here in this forum on the 2nd page of this thread.

Deb wrote:I must admit some of the details of this case are outside my own understanding, but this is turning into an event of widespread media concern. It seems only fair to present Astrolabe's side of the story. The following is a statement released by them which I am also publishing outside the forum on this link:
http://skyscript.co.uk/astrolabe.html

Yes, as Curtis said, I've already published that email here on the forum.. But to be even fairer (for all people who have contributed their own time for a project without ever receiveing a penny), read this follow-up at http://www.thedailyparker.com/PermaLink ... 8a641.aspx
It presents very good points for each paragraph of that email..

Sorry, I didn't realise it had been previously published in this forum. Thanks for pointing that out. I received a copy of this by email with the request that it is published as a statement. May as well leave it, as it won't do any harm. The problem with the rebuttal in the link above is that it is emotive. If the points are well made there is no need to resort to ridicule whilst purporting to offer expertise on legal matters. I note the criticism comes from a software developer though, not an expert on copyright law.

From my very limited understanding I would have supposed that the case hinges on one point only. Is that database copyrighted or not? Astrolabe's argument is that it is and royalties are due to the main developers of it. If that's true then why should it matter that big corporations have used it and will be in a mess without it? I suppose they are ones best placed to pay royalties if royalties are due.