UK Royal Mail Uses Copyright Claim To Shut Down Postal Code Info Online

from the address-not-found dept

One good thing in US copyright law compared to other countries is that we don't allow copyright on pure facts or on gov't produced information. Other countries aren't nearly as good about that, with ridiculous concepts like "Crown Copyright." Over in the UK, for example the Royal Mail has apparently bullied some site for making postal code data available. The info has now been taken offline, as the site claims it doesn't have the legal resources to fight this. The Royal Mail says that it was a violation of its intellectual property, and, of course, wants to license the database of postal codes at a mere £4,000 per year -- a bit steep for smaller community or non-profit sites. So, can anyone explain how copyright makes sense here? Was copyright really the incentive necessary to create postal codes?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2009 @ 9:14pm

    Mike - it's in the UK, so copyight does not stem from the US constitution goal of encouraging creation. It's just the remains of the time-honored (?) royal-granted mandate/Monopoly.
    That said - the story does show the stupidity of government officials

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Michael Vilain, Oct 6th, 2009 @ 10:44pm

    What if someone hosts the data in Nepal or Ukraine?

    What's to stop someone from sucking the data to a server out of the Royal Mail's jurisdiction? Could they still file suit? Would the data still be copyrighted in another country where the copyright laws are different?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    anon, Oct 6th, 2009 @ 10:58pm

    Hi Mike:

    I wish things were better in the U.S. than they are in the U.K. but they're not. Regardless of what Congress has enacted into law, or the Supreme Court has said about government works, the Post Office continues to "enforce" a copyright in their works.

    The Copyright Office treats Post Office works as non-governmental works and grants registration, unquestionably due to some inter-agency lobbying -- licensing is a good money maker for the Post Office.

    Now, you could, of course, use the Post Office's works without permission and you would never get sued (because they will never sue anyone for infringement and risk the precedent.) But if you have a company with anything to lose, you can't piss off the Post Office. The agency has an investigatory wing and you can't afford to make enemies.

    It's the classic chilling effect; an agency that leverages their influence to break U.S. law and silence its citizens.

    What can you do?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    GeneralEmergency (profile), Oct 6th, 2009 @ 11:19pm

    What can you do? Easy answer....

    So the UK Post Nannies think they can copy Postal codes?


    Solution: STOP USING THE CODES.

    Make these avaricious, lazy, good for nothing, suction devices attached to the Public Tax Teat look up the damn codes themselves for EACH and EVERY Piece of MAIL.

    Of all the unmitigated gall.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 12:29am

    Great story Mike, unfortunately you seem to have added a bunch of "Masnick facts" to perhaps make more of asplash ?
    e.g. the real story :
    * has nothing to do with "crown copyright"

    * might have legitimate legal basis "Harry Metcalfe, co-founder of Ernestmarples.com, declined to say how it got access to the postcode data."

    * there are other sources of postcode data available although they might not be so accurate.

    You'll never replace real journalism with this approach.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Alex Terman, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 12:33am

    This is sadly enforcable.

    The Postcode system was created by the Royal Mail, they have every right to protect the data.

    The Royal Mail licenses the postcode database to businesses (this database can lookup addresses via postcodes, and look up postcodes via addresses). If another site is doing the same thing, thus getting around the pay-for option (It's £75,000 for a corporate license, you do the math for the $ cost), the Royal Mail has every right to protect its interests and IP.

    Do I like it? No. But the company has certain rights to protect its income.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    zenith (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 1:20am

    How is this an example of Crown Copyright, when Royal Mail is a private company?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Captain Kibble (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 1:28am

    Re: This is sadly enforcable.

    It isn't just a normal company though is it? The postcode system was created while the Royal Mail was a 'proper' nationalised business and the money used was from public funds. The Royal Mail is still a limited company owned by the government. The British taxpayer paid for the postcode system directly so in my opinion the the database should be public domain. If the Royal Mail want to run an API that allows people access and make money from providing the infrastructure to do searches and the like that is fine. A copy of data however should be available freely to anyone who wants it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 1:39am

    Re:

    The postal code system was paid for via government funds, before Royal Mail was privatized. Thus it would full under government, or Crown, copyright.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    zenith (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 2:03am

    "The postal code system was paid for via government funds, before Royal Mail was privatized. Thus it would full under government, or Crown, copyright."

    But now it's a private company, it doesn't fall under the government in anyway, it's therefore not - it's just "copyright"... surely? I can see how it *was*... "Royal Mail" is just a trademark now. It means nothing in the context of the public sector or government.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 2:57am

    Re: This is sadly enforcable.

    Oh no it isn't

    If you ahve a Sat Nav then ALL of this information is in there - in fact you can do the Address-post code and Post Code-> address thing quite easily and you can also link that data to a Latitude and Longitude.

    The same information is also available via Google Maps.

    Are they threatening Google?

    No?

    I wonder why?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 3:04am

    Re: Re: This is sadly enforcable.

    Where do you thing Google and the Sat Nav companies got their Post Code data from in the first place? They're not threatening them because they paid the license fee.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Tina Mammoser, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 3:29am

    As for copyright itself the postcodes are copyright to the Crown even though the company using that information, the Royal Mail, is now private. The copyright belongs to the creator, not the publisher/distributor.

    But since the Royal Mail distributes postcode information freely online (on their website anyone can search an address and get the free zipcode, or vice versa) this case seems absurd.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    twilson (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 3:50am

    Just as with UK Ordnance Survey mapping data, Postal Codes belong to the Crown.

    And just because you can find out postcode information freely online from the Royal Mail does not give you permission to scrape their site or allow you to redistribute that information, as I'm sure the Royal Mail website points out.

    This is very much a non-issue.

    Also with regards to Google, I think there is a licensing restriction (probably for a cheaper fee) that prevents them from displaying the full postcode on Google Maps (hence you only see the first half), although you can search with the full postcode.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    CAS, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 4:05am

    Re:

    I agree - Mike, every so often I find that you've bent the facts to make a point. It's a shame because you're hurting your credibility with me.

    The story sounds like Ernestmarples.com was hacking into their database to get the data. Whether that is or is not the case, declining the write your story evenhandedly has hurt your credibility.

    Sad. =/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 4:16am

    Here's my postcode: L4 2TW
    And that of my workplace: L9 7AL

    Public information.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    John Doe, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 4:21am

    You can get the US postal code info from one of a dozen companies for $30.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    ethorad, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 5:41am

    not so anonymous?

    Amusing that someone posted their postcode ... as anonymous

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 5:52am

    Re:

    I wonder how many more times Mike has to say that this is not a newspaper, but an opinion blog.

    "Hey! You wrote a love letter to your girlfriend! It's not fact checked! You're never going to replace real journalism with this approach!"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    John Duncan Yoyo (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 5:55am

    Re: Re: Re: This is sadly enforcable.

    If the royal post does not offer an user friendly way to find this data then don't include postal codes. I'd be willing to wager they waste more money looking up the codes than they ever get from the licenses.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Vincent Clement, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 6:12am

    Re:

    A private company owned by the Her Majesty's Government.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    CAS, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 6:35am

    Re: Re:

    It's fine that it's an opinion blog, and it's even fine that he doesn't rigorously fact check.

    But in this case, I think he's re-interpreting the article that he linked to. That's not fact checking, that's actually reading the article.

    It's a key difference that I think is important. I think he's made a lot of great points and has pointed out some interesting things here. The problem is, if I can't trust that he's accurately relayed the details in the linked article how can I trust his conclusions?

    Mike - I'd love to see a response, but I'm sure this comment is hidden under hundreds of others so I've had to resort to talking about you, not to you. Sorry!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 6:53am

    Re:

    Your concerns are very valid...

    A lot of the problem seems to be vague language: "We have simply asked a third party to stop allowing unauthorised access to Royal Mail data, in contravention of our intellectual property rights,"

    There's some doubt as to what is meant by "unauthorised access" - did they mean "unauthorised use" (which would make sense since they go on to say it was in violation of IP rights) - or did they actually mean unauthorized access obtained through some nefarious means (which I agree is slightly suggested by the Metcalfe declining to comment and saying there are "questions" about how they obtained the data).

    I'm not sure which is the case. Maybe this wasn't Mike's most thorough post ever, but I'm not ready to accuse him of "adding Masnick facts to make more of a splash"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 7:32am

    Re: not so anonymous?

    Or at least they posted a post code that they assert is theirs. I am not familiar with the formatting so I can't tell if those are valid postcodes or not.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 8:55am

    Re:

    "* has nothing to do with "crown copyright""

    The ROYAL Mail's "copyright" isn't crown copyright? Either it is, or they're misrepresenting themselves.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 10:12am

    Re: Re:

    Irrelevant if they are not trying to invoke the special rules of crown copyright as opposed to ordinary copyright.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Sheinen, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 10:17am

    They are valid examples.

    In fact a quick google tells me that guy lives in Hornsey Road, Liverpool, Merseyside.

    This is what's ridiculous. They aren't exactly hidden! Do I have to pay the Royal Mail every time I tell someone my address and use 'their' postcode?

    The Posties are stiking over here AGAIN soon by the way.

    And if you think 'not using the code' is going to force them to do more work? Beep - wrong answer! They just 'lose' the letter! 14.4million letters are lost every year according to BBC News. And thats WITH Post Codes!

    I've spoken to post men about this before, to which they reply that the management are paid dispraportionate wages while they do all the leg work...Well fucking der?! That's how companies work! You knew that when you signed up for the job dipshit!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Anon, Oct 7th, 2009 @ 2:47pm

    I think this post is pretty misleading. The Royal Mail aren't saying that no one can use postcodes, or even that postcodes are covered by copyright. They're saying Ernestmarples.com is allowing people to use the Royal Mail database for free. If RM are charging for a licence then isn't that... theft? After all someone at RM must compile and maintain this database and unfortunately they need to get paid for that work.

    If Ernestmarples wants to make its own database of every postcode in the UK then I think that would be a different story - one RM may not like but would have less of a legal stand point. However I'm pretty sure that would be ridiculously time consuming.

    As for people talking about other companies that offer postcodes, maybe they do have their own database or maybe, heaven forbid, they pay for a licence.

    Royal Mail has to make money like every other company, would you rather they put up postage or cut workers pay so we have even more bloody strikes?

    (PS The ROYAL Mail's "copyright" isn't crown copyright? Either it is, or they're misrepresenting themselves - this is a joke right?)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 3:15pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    "Irrelevant if they are not trying to invoke the special rules of crown copyright as opposed to ordinary copyright."

    The fact that they have any copyright at all means 'crown copyright.' Or as we say on this side of the pond, 'douchebag governmental copyright for no good reason.'

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 7th, 2009 @ 11:17pm

    Re:

    They're saying Ernestmarples.com is allowing people to use the Royal Mail database for free. If RM are charging for a licence then isn't that... theft? After all someone at RM must compile and maintain this database and unfortunately they need to get paid for that work.

    Nope. No one has a right to "get paid" for their work. If the market/technology/climate changes and their business model can't handle it, that's THEIR problem, not those who demonstrated the problems with the system.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anon, Oct 8th, 2009 @ 12:15am

    Re: Re:

    It is if thy are stealing their work. Lik I said if ernestmaples.com made a different database themselves THEN I would agree that Royal Mail doesn't have a right to shut them down but the article seems to be saying that Ernestmaples just used their database, the person who made and maintained that databse does have a right to get paid. This hasn't exposed a flaw in their business model its just shown a flaw in their security. [i]No one has a right to "get paid" for their work[/i] - Most people do?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 8th, 2009 @ 5:31am

    I don't see where Mike claimed the Royal Mail and Crown Copyright are linked other than them both being stupid ideas comparatively. I can forgive people whose first language is not english, but not those who do speak english as their first language and are failing at basic reading comprehension. Please try harder next time.

    I agree with Mike on this one and would also love an answer to his question, to "explain how copyright makes sense here? Was copyright really the incentive necessary to create postal codes?" I would especially love to hear an answer to this from those whom agree with the actions of Royal Mail et al.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Oct 8th, 2009 @ 10:28am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "[i]No one has a right to "get paid" for their work[/i] - Most people do?"

    Are you saying they haven't been? Or just that they should *continue* to get paid.

    If the latter, are the guys who actually did the work going to see any of that money?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    Mamun Ahmed, Oct 8th, 2009 @ 4:28pm

    hm !!

    I guess it is because Royal Mail already struggling to be in business....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Mamun Ahmed, Oct 8th, 2009 @ 4:29pm

    ?

    Ps: or perhaps Royal Mail wanted to show its muscle?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    identicon
    Peter, Oct 9th, 2009 @ 6:39am

    1) The UK/European copyright laws are better for the owners of data. They protect the 'effort of compiling', so use teh sweat of brow doctrine. In the USA that doctrine was rejected recently in a US Supreme Court verdict, basically denying database owners their property rights. The erosion of property rights has gotten very bad in the USA, so bad that database owners are often moving their property to Europe for better protection.

    2) As to 'government' having greater copyright privileges in the UK than in the USA, that is not true anymore. In the USA federal government is virtually untouchable, so cannot be sued successfully and they abuse that by claiming copyright and charging licensing for anything they get their hands on, including publicly owned art, documents, databases etc.

    3) One can of course always move the copy of the postal database in the UK to a country that has no copyright treaty with the UK, and voila, the Royal Mail cannot touch you. The question is of course then how you can get any revenue from UK users sent to your country, since the UK can in theory confiscate any such revenue then as 'illegitimate'.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Johny Adams, Apr 8th, 2010 @ 7:38am

    Google API free does not have a UK license for postcodes hence the accuracy of using Google maps for store Locators is very poor. They also cannot Gecode Ireland, Developers and agency's have awful get rounds which often show US towns instead of UK as only based on the first 4 digits of a postcode.

    In all, no professional would use Google as there are specialists such as Bing and ViaMichelin would have the full kit available for business's

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This