Re: [govtrack] Re: Proposed new terms of data use
- aronpilhofer wrote:
> Incidentally, I agree that API's are a rather crappy way ofWell, look, I wasn't making a statement about APIs in general.
> distributing data en toto, but who is arguing this as an either/or?
> There is significant value in both.
I was responding to a response to my statement about contributing to the
commons, and I was saying that an API doesn't contribute the data to the
In the case of the Times's FEC API, the data is already available in
bulk from the FEC. You're providing an additional service to make things
easier, and I say that is only a good thing. You're also a commercial
enterprise, with different goals, and I meant to only be addressing the
strictly nonprofit/transparency world, though I know I didn't say it.
> On the specific point that started this thread, it might be a goodFor all the time I put into it, I think I get a little say in how it is
> time to gently remind you that this is not your data.
used (if you access my server to get it). I have no moral obligation to
provide the data to everyone. At worst it would be hypocritical to start
adding restrictions when I talk about openness, which is why I don't
actually have any.
And the irony is not past me that if I actually add a restriction,
someone could fork the project.
> There are going to be people out there whoBut that doesn't mean I shouldn't have an expectation about what they
> take, and don't give back.
*ought* to be doing. The fact that someone isn't contributing data that
they have back doesn't mean I stop asking.
- Josh Tauberer
"Yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation! Yields
falsehood when preceded by its quotation!" Achilles to
Tortoise (in "Godel, Escher, Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter)
> Well, look, I wasn't making a statement about APIs in general.Fair enough. I move to strike my statement from the record.
> For all the time I put into it, I think I get a little say in how it >isI guess that depends on what restrictions you do decide to slap on it,
if any. I'm not telling you anything you don't know -- but that's part
of the deal when you decide to open things up. People take and don't
play nice. It sucks, but you can't really have it both ways.
>The fact that someone isn't contributing data >thatNo one said that. But putting some kind of license on the data to
> they have back doesn't mean I stop asking.
enforce it, that's another matter.