Surveying is not Art and Science...only a math problem
> In 2003 Knud E. Hermansen published an article "Copyright Basics for Surveyors (pdf)" that should be reviewed and I would suggest forwarded to the legal council of the board that generated this letter. I would be interested to hear the response of that legal council to the content of the article.
More from the transcript:
The Surveyor’s statement to the Board:
First, I would like to thank the board for allowing me the privilege of surveying in the state of Arkansas for the past 27 years as a professional. I have always tried to protect the rights of the public and keep peace in the neighborhood. I have not attempted to restrict the use of my survey plats. In fact, I record my plats in the circuit clerk's offices of the counties I work. I placed the copyright statement on my plats merely to preserve my rights in an ambiguous area of the law. It surprises me that you are calling me on this now, considering how long surveyors in the state of Arkansas have been placing copyright statements on their plats. I remember back in '79 or '80 attending a surveyor's meeting in Springdale, one of the seminars was presented by a patent attorney. I remember the discussions and conversations afterward and how the company I was working for started to put that little c inside a circle on their plats. There have been close to 200 plats recorded at the State Land Surveyor's Office with some kind of copyright statement on them in the last six months, not including mine. Once again I am merely trying to preserve my rights in an ambiguous area of the law.
Surveyor’s cross examination of Everett Rowland, Arkansas State Surveyor:
Q Well, I'm not trying to enforce any kind of copyright, so all I'm saying is by putting that statement on there that the law is ambiguous at this point, and until it's settled in law I don't think I should be made to take the note off. I mean, all
I'm trying to do is preserve a right that I may have something -- some right or I may not.
A I will say this on the -- on what you come up with, there was a guy from out of state come in, and I believe it was Springdale, and he told a whole group that they could copyright, which is absolutely false.
Q That may have been the meeting that --
A And then that got -- that got everybody doing it.
Q Uh-huh.
A That's where it came from.
Q Do you remember that meeting back?
A Yeah, vaguely, yeah.
Q Yeah, a long time ago.
A Yeah, we get them from out of state. Maybe their state does it, I don't believe it.
Q Well, it's a federal law, I mean, copyright, isn't it?
A Copyright is, but not for land surveyors.
According to Ben Kittler with the State Land Surveyor's office, the seminar mentioned above was presented by Knud E. Hermansen...
DDSM:beer:
Surveying is not Art and Science...only a math problem
If someone wanted to copy recorded plats into a GIS system, that would be a copyright question, and the issues of fair use or implied license would have to be figured out. But if they are just taking the information from the plats (bearings, distances, coordinates, building locations) without copying the image, it probably isn't a copyright matter at all. Anybody who can see the information can use the information, and publish the information in their own words (or their own symbols, or coordinates).
Surveying is not Art and Science...only a math problem
Why is the State Surveyor seen to be an expert on Federal Copyright law? It seems like the state board totally deferred to his opinion, as a land surveyor, rather than consulting a knowledgeable copyright attorney? This state surveyor is practicing outside of his area of expertise and should be reprimanded by the State Board/Bar.
My local Prop. Appraiser produces parcel maps that are copyrighted. Rand McNally Copyrights their maps. So does Google. Maps are absolutely copyrightable.
A survey is more than a "math problem", it presents my interpretation of my research, my field data collection, and my professional judgement and opinions. It contains notes I created and a report that I authored that represents my "original thoughts".
I hope the surveyors of Arkansas put this ignorant and arrogant wanna be lawyer in his place. "Yeah, it's a Federal Law, but not for surveyors ... ". Please.
Surveying is not Art and Science...only a math problem
Sure, but that's not the issue. The issue is they are penalizing or threatening to penalize surveyors for exercising their civil rights and putting copyright notices on maps. That pisses me off to the extent I would have already started talking to attorneys to see if one wanted to take it on. I don't see anything in the transcript that says the (or any) surveyor has a problem with the public GIS using information from the filed maps. The particular note addressed GIS, but with a "might be" and the transcript shows the surveyor just wants whatever protection is available under their civil rights. It is a copyright violation for a private company to resell a copy of the filed maps. How that fits into private GIS may not have yet been addressed by the courts. But we are entitled to protect our interests with the copyright notes or symbols even, or especially on maps we file.
I would go to the clerks office with a stamp and start stamping copyrights on all maps I had previously filed without one, just to be contrary and force the issue.
Surveying is not Art and Science...only a math problem
Here is an example of the plat note in question.
The copyright note shown in the title block is also 'wrong' according to the State Surveyor.
I think the whole thing came to a head when our plats, that we are required to file with the State Surveyor, were scanned and put on-line. The real-estate and title insurance folks love this Site. No need to go to the Courthouse and pay for a copy...just download a PDF. Note that these PDF files can be edited...clipped...copied...chopped...
Prior to the Arkansas statues being changed from 'file at the courthouse' to file with the 'State Surveyor', the files sent to the State Surveyor was to be an research archive for the surveyors...to back up files in case of fire at one's office or at the courthouse...and for the State Surveyors review to insure meeting standards of practice. In my opinion, the files of the State Surveyor was not intended to be the 'Public Record' as that was the duty of the County Clerk.
Also note that the 'letter' does not mention plats...but surveys.
DDSM:beer:
I'm sorry . . .
> You mean to say there are surveyors who will use a ROS(filed survey) for the actual data that goes on their survey?
Either that, or their measurments are exactly the same as mine....B-)
This thread, and particularly the statement of the Arkansas State surveyor, has pretty much proven to me that our profession has been led down the wrong path by a bunch of morons. At least I can be glad that I don't work in a "recording state". For the PITA it can be not to have old survey records, at least I don't have some bureaucrat telling me that my work is "public", that I have no control over it's use in the future, and must freely give away copies of my work to all members of the public for the rest of eternity.
What they heck kind of business model is that? Do title companies record their title abstracts and freely give it away to the next buyer, or their competition? Do home inspectors? Geologists? How did surveyors get into the free information business? Oh, and even better, I'm sure the clerk's office is making money off reselling your prints? What is it, $5 a page? How much of that $5 does the surveyor get??? Or California, where apparently a surveyor's client get's to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to have the work reviewed before it's recorded ...
How much did the Arkansas GIS data entry guy pay for the right to use the information? Was the contract to survey the land between the surveyor and the owner, or between the surveyor and the public?
I've never tried to copyright any of my work. I'm not taking a stand here one way or the other. I'm just curious about the reasons for it. What is the purpose? Is it for liability protection and to prevent any use of the map? Is it money, how much money do those that do copyright expect to further make from the map past the initial invoice to the client? Is it a few bucks a few times or thousands?
If you were in a filing state like me where the surveys are filed with the county suruveyor (you pay a fee to file it). Would it make it OK if you where paid per view/copy? If so how much?
Then once it's digital isn't it sort of like music, you really can't control it?
Do you produce the maps to make a living selling thousands of them at say $25 a copy. How many times can you actually sell a survey plat?
It really looks like to me you are trying to control liability and not really losing money on the further copies made of the maps.
I can see it better with, say a home designer where the plans could be copied and built over and over hundreds of times. But really, can you sell your survey plat to another client in the next county to use on his land?
There is some value to me to be able to review other surveys in an area where I'm doing some work. So I suppose I give to be able to receive. No it doesn't always work out fair but over all in the long term probably evens out.
OK, I read the Hermansen paper. For me I can see about zero benefit from copyrighting my work. The fair uses cover about all anyone would gain from my maps. If someone really violated the copyright, it would cost me more to get the damages than the damages. It also says my work is copyrighted, its just I'd have to register it to pursue a claim. I ain't going to worry about it. If you want liability protection I'd say you get more bang for the trouble from insurance. But that's just me working in my environment. Might be different in other areas.
$61,000,000 would go a long way if used to hire surveyors to give up their copyright and assist in the GIS. Arkansas Act 196
DDSM;-)
I would like to build a seamless survey cadaster for them for $69,999,999.99, but I would want to copywrite it, and give the counties unlimited licensees to use it for internal purposes only. I wonder if the bourd thought about copywrite infringement before gather printed copies to give to each board member before the hearing. I guess if they are wrong, they can go after their legal councle/state surveyor..
> I've never tried to copyright any of my work.
I registered the ALTA that I discovered was being used by a design firm without my permission, but after investigating copyright law concluded that it offered me no protection in the matter.
P.S. The reason I was tweaked about my ALTA being used by others is that the client for whom I did the work never paid. I sued him in in Small Claims Court and obtained a judgment, only to find that he's judgment-proof. With interest, that judgment is now worth around $9k on paper, but I don't think I'll ever see a nickel of it.
It appears to me the Arkansas State Board has violated a Federal Law and has further moved to eliminate the creators rights to the original works, in my opinion this move is to restrict future commerce, all in the name of protecting the public. IN North Carolina the NC Dental Board that restricted commerce in the name of protecting the public, and the SCOTUS ruled against them. Looks like the Arkansas State Board has received some advice from individuals that have no idea what they are talking about, and that is evident in their disregard for the copyright laws and more importantly the federal trade commission laws.
