Skyscript Astrology Forum

My Ubuntu Linux machine just updated automatically to tz_data 2011k, so the project is still moving on..

After some more research into this issue, I'm finding out that Astrolabe is attempting to get past the limitation of the fact that you can't copyright facts by saying that the ACS Atlas contains "interpretations" of time zone information. See section 5 of the following:

http://web.mit.edu/jhawk/tmp/tz/gov.usc ... 42.1.0.pdf

In other words they're guessing because they don't really know in many instances when the time changes occur.

If this is true, then:

1.) My claim that the ACS Atlas is inaccurate has been validated.
2.) This is starting to look like a case of copyright trolling.

However, I remember seeing in many comments that Arthur had many of his own "guesses" due to doubts when contrasting the ACS data to other sources which leads me to think that this case won't stand up even on the "interpretation" issue. This was the reason why I added the notes to the Terran Atlas as pop up hints when the data was in question because I was seeing this all over the place.

Also, because Olson has a 1970 zone horizon, the data itself has to be recorded differently. I don't see how this case has a chance.

As many others, I've send an email to Astrolabe showing my disapointment with their act. They have answered, so I will write here their response:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.

Personally, I purchased physical copies (hardcovers with dustjackets) of both 'The American Atlas' and 'The International Atlas' by Thomas Shanks, as published by ACS in the 1980s, second-hand, a couple of years ago, little suspecting that such a storm could be brewing in the background.

In the process of those recent second-hand purchases, unfortunately none of the compilers received a cent in royalties, yet I now have full access to the historical data, entirely legitimately. There are many other second-hand copies of both books on the market still today at low prices, including similar ones to those I bought, hardbound and in fine condition.

Though I have no knowledge of the exact use that has been made of the data by Olson & co., on a theoretical level at least I can understand Gary Christen's (and Astrolabe's) point here. Whether or not there are inaccuracies in the data compiled by Shanks et al,, copying it directly from their work for a database which then had secondary commercial applications could be construed as a use of copyrighted material on which royalties were therefore owed to those who had put the work into the original research. If, however, Olson & co. were to compile their database independently from primary sources, it would be a different story. Astrolabe might have a case if they can prove that the Shanks et al. data was uncritically copied without independent verification for a database that was then commercially exploited by third parties.

jventura wrote:4. ...

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.

This attempts to say that the Olson standard is a "cheap imitation" which is not the case. Olson found many problems with the ACS Atlas and made corrections in the process. This is just a fancy way of saying that ACS guessed the times of transition but at the same time trying to make it look like their method will "mystically" derive the correct time for chart calculation through their proprietary method as if they are the high priesthood for divining times of transition. This is ridiculous and it reads like a BS commercial. I'm not buying it. You either have the recorded fact or you don't and the transition time "guessed" is most likely going to be wrong. Steve Ferguson found 3200 errors going in alphabetical order up to Connecticut doing his own research and confirmed the sloppiness of the ACS data.

(For example, in some cases a hospital would record birth times using Standard Time while the surrounding city was on Daylight Time._

This is a red herring. The Olson database never associates a time with a location other than to use a city to represent a single time standard for an entire region. Because the Olson database has a 1970 horizon, these regions by necessity are very different than the ACS derived regions whatever they may be because of that horizon. Hospitals are not in the Olson database and there is no direct linkage between a location and the time. All the Olson database does is provide a label and a time standard for that label.

Astrolabe needs to grow up and recognize that there are other time zone researchers out there and many of them are more qualified than the ACS people were.

Philip Graves wrote:Though I have no knowledge of the exact use that has been made of the data by Olson & co., on a theoretical level at least I can understand Gary Christen's (and Astrolabe's) point here. Whether or not there are inaccuracies in the data compiled by Shanks et al,, copying it directly from their work for a database which then had secondary commercial applications could be construed as a use of copyrighted material on which royalties were therefore owed to those who had put the work into the original research. If, however, Olson & co. were to compile their database independently from primary sources, it would be a different story. Astrolabe might have a case if they can prove that the Shanks et al. data was uncritically copied without independent verification for a database that was then commercially exploited by third parties.

Hi Philip,

about the copyright of crude data (read facts), there is a specific case where it was established that information without a minimum of original creativity can't be copyrighted. In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural , the case was about a phone book company which copied entirely the work of the other. The decision was that facts aren't copyrightable, so it was legal to copy the phone listing in its entirity. But one thing is the list of numbers, the other is the physical book. Only the physical book was copyrighted!

Regarding this case, even if Olson copied entirely the ACS atlas, it would be legal, because again, facts aren't copyrightable. You may say that the ACS people were original in their investigation, and so, comply with the "minimum of original creativity" said above. Well, they could have been, but that has nothing to do with the facts gathered. Even more, the ACS data on Olson database was then verified and in many cases, it had to be changed..

Facts belongs to the culture/science of the humanity. Imagine if someone copyrighted the fact that PI=3.1415(...). Nobody would be able to use PI for calculations, would we? And to get PI, that someone had to be creative, he have had to measure several perimeters, radius, compare the information, etc..

Edit: On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow you can read: Under the Feist ruling in the US, mere collections of facts are considered unoriginal and thus not protected by copyright, no matter how much work went into collating them. The arrangement and presentation of a collection may be original, but not if it is "simple and obvious" such as a list in alphabetical or chronological order.

jventura wrote:...about the copyright of crude data (read facts), there is a specific case where it was established that information without a minimum of original creativity can't be copyrighted. In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural , the case was about a phone book company which copied entirely the work of the other. The decision was that facts aren't copyrightable, so it was legal to copy the phone listing in its entirity. But one thing is the list of numbers, the other is the physical book. Only the physical book was copyrighted!

Exactly. Astrolabe is confusing the data with the arrangement of data. In other words you wouldn't want to come out with your own book with the title "American Atlas" with the same data in a book in substantially the same arrangement because it would be like stealing a "brand" like those cheap knock offs of Levi jeans in Russia.

There are facts, but then there is also expression, which is copyrightable. If the database adopted the exact same manner of expressing the time change facts it could be construed a breach of copyright. Time changes are something that can be expressed in various ways; with telephone numbers, there is less room for variation.

Further to this, Astrolabe appear from earlier postings in this strand to be arguing that not all the entries in their listings were recognised as facts in the public domain but were instead their judgements based on their research into areas where the true facts were not entirely clear. If these judgements had themselves been copied wholesale to a database that was then used commercially, Astrolabe could argue in court that their copyright had been breached.

Even if some changes had then been made to the database subsequently, it would only be necessary for Astrolabe to demonstrate that parts of the work to which they own the copyright, above and beyond the public domain facts reported within, had been replicated by the database, for them to stand a chance of a judgement in their favour.

Companies by their nature tend to aggressively defend their intellectual property and copyrights, and what Astrolabe is doing here in spirit appears on the surface little different to me from any other copyright lawsuit launched by a publishing company. It is arguably only because the disputed material in question includes a substantial or majority portion of public domain facts that this case is a particularly grey-looking area compared with most.

If the Olson database is on any of the technical grounds suggested above in breach of Astrolabe's copyright, it would seem that it would not take a huge amount of time and effort for the team behind the database to make changes that eliminate the direct sourcing of their material in Astrolabe's prior work. This would then resolve the problem. Astrolabe clearly cannot copyright facts on time changes in general or prevent other software makers from bypassing the option to pay for a license to use their work and instead using independent research or primary public domain sources. I hope for the sake of Curtis and others standing to be affected by the outcome of the ongoing lawsuit that it doesn't drag on too long before some such solution can be arrived at.

Philip Graves wrote:I hope for the sake of Curtis and others standing to be affected by the outcome of the ongoing lawsuit that it doesn't drag on too long before some such solution can be arrived at.

Phillip,

Did you see Gary Christen's letter to me reproduced at the beginning of this thread?

For years ACS was touted to be highly accurate and now the company admits that much of it is "creative writing". If it isn't a fact, then its fiction. The only way to make a fact into fiction is to falsify it in some way. So by their own admission the ACS data is "creatively mistaken" much of the time in where the time changes occur which should make every astrologers skin crawl. It is extreme hypocrisy to assert the accuracy of the atlas on the one hand for years in astrological journals and on the other try to say its creative writing when the issue comes up in court. It is intellectually dishonest.

I am familiar with the format of the Olson database having read practically every line that Paul Eggert wrote in it, and I have the American Atlas and I can say that the formats that the data were recorded in are completely different. Olson used the printed books to do the research. They may have some of the same "creative facts" as I'm sure is the case with Janus, Kepler, etc in their data if they all want to be in reasonable agreement, but the way it is recorded in the database portion is completely different.

For example (from the Olson database):

# Part of Kentucky left its clocks alone in 1974.
# This also includes Clark, Floyd, and Harrison counties in Indiana.
# Rule NAME FROM TO TYPE IN ON AT SAVE LETTER
Rule Louisville 1921 only - May 1 2:00 1:00 D
Rule Louisville 1921 only - Sep 1 2:00 0 S
Rule Louisville 1941 1961 - Apr lastSun 2:00 1:00 D
Rule Louisville 1941 only - Sep lastSun 2:00 0 S
Rule Louisville 1946 only - Jun 2 2:00 0 S
Rule Louisville 1950 1955 - Sep lastSun 2:00 0 S
Rule Louisville 1956 1960 - Oct lastSun 2:00 0 S
# Zone NAME GMTOFF RULES FORMAT [UNTIL]
Zone America/Kentucky/Louisville -5:43:02 - LMT 1883 Nov 18 12:16:58
-6:00 US C%sT 1921
-6:00 Louisville C%sT 1942
-6:00 US C%sT 1946
-6:00 Louisville C%sT 1961 Jul 23 2:00
-5:00 - EST 1968
-5:00 US E%sT 1974 Jan 6 2:00
-6:00 1:00 CDT 1974 Oct 27 2:00
-5:00 US E%sT

You will find that this format is very different from the way the American Atlas displays this data, so check your American Atlas for Louisville, KY.

And in case anybody tries to assert that I can be sued for reproducing the above excerpt, let me say that this falls under "fair use" under copyright law.

zoidsoft wrote: So by their own admission the ACS data is "creatively mistaken" much of the time in where the time changes occur which should make every astrologers skin crawl. It is extreme hypocrisy to assert the accuracy of the atlas on the one hand for years in astrological journals and on the other try to say its creative writing when the issue comes up in court. It is intellectually dishonest.

Curtis,

so, you also understood from their email that they do confirm that some of their historical data may have been falsified? This is going from bad to worse to Astrolabe and ACS Atlas. To some astrologers it means that their "historical" charts, delineations, etc., may be wrong. We are talking about data previous to 1970, correct?

Also, to reinforce your answer, the Olson database is rewritten very differently from ACS atlases, is more machine readable, and most of those historical errors have been posteriorly corrected by members of the open community. More than anything, ACS data was a starting point, and currently Olson db resembles loosely anything of its ACS past..

Jo?o Ventura

jventura wrote:so, you also understood from their email that they do confirm that some of their historical data may have been falsified? This is going from bad to worse to Astrolabe and ACS Atlas. To some astrologers it means that their "historical" charts, delineations, etc., may be wrong. We are talking about data previous to 1970, correct?

For the most part, prior to 1970, yes, but there are occasionally problems with time change info all the way to the present, just less frequently.

False data in maps for example only confirm whether something has been copied or not. It doesn't necessarily mean infringement occurred. Olson readily admits to using the ACS data so this sort of confirmation is redundant. I think Astrolabe may be misrepresenting the nature of their protection of the ACS Atlas in copyright... In other words how is it protected? The argument that the method of obtaining the data is a proprietary method is masquerading as a "sweat of the brow" argument and not a "uniqueness" argument, because it doesn't matter if the method to gather the data is unique. The data itself has to be unique. For the method to matter, Astrolabe should have applied for a patent, not copyright.

The sweat of the brow argument is not allowed in the USA so it doesn't matter if the individual items match and I think it doesn't matter that it is a fiction either. I'm pretty sure that the nature of copyright protection in databases is to preserve the data relations between tables and amongst entries as a whole, not as each item taken from one location to another. There has to be substantial matching and relationships between relational databases have to be preserved.

Just imagine if Kepler happened to match Solar Fire for a single entry, then there would be infringement of the ACS data by Kepler if the data was false? I don't think so, because Kepler will undoubtedly have some matching results out of the hundreds of thousands of entries, it is a matter of "how much" agreement there is. Too much and there is infringement, but accidental matches or even intentional matches but in a different relationship I believe would not be considered infringement.

It also occurred to me that if something is stated as a fact such as is the case with the ACS Atlas, then it probably has the status of "fact" even if there are mistakes or creative "inventions" of made up "facts". There are undoubtedly mistakes in any database made up of facts. This doesn't make it "creative writing" and I doubt that the fact that it was apparently intentional makes a difference here. Otherwise there would be "gotchas" with databases everywhere and everyone could bypass the "fact" clause intended by the courts to try to usurp the "sweat of the brow argument". When something is stated in a factual manner such as a database, you can't reasonably expect someone to think its "creative". I'm convinced that the court will see this for what this is.

But since Astrolabe states that it has no problems with current TZ data, only data pre-2000, I will go ahead and make updates to the Terran Atlas for the recent changes in Russia, Hebron, Gaza, etc... Should be out in a couple of days.