You're viewing an article in iPO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site: iPod Subway Maps Creator Sees Mixed Reactions From Transit Officials

News

iPod Subway Maps Creator Sees Mixed Reactions From Transit Officials

Friday, September 30th, 2005 at 2:05 PM - by Staff

When William Bright created his iPod Subway Maps Web site in August, he told Associated Press writer David Caruso that it "was supposed to be for fun." Tens of thousands of public transit riders in New York City, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Paris, Washington, D.C. and other cities have downloaded his maps since then, but he's run into problems from some transportation agencies that say he doesn't have the right to distribute their copyrighted material.

For example, New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) told Mr. Bright in mid-September to "cease and desist," followed soon after by San Francisco's Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART). The MTA has since said that it will offer him a one-year license, at a cost of US$500, to distribute the map for free, if he promises to keep it updated.

According to the blog on Mr. Bright's Web site, he's still weighing his options, one of which is to create a map that is different enough from the MTA's that he doesn't violate their copyright. He was able to circumvent his problems with BART by designing an original map that is now available from his site.

On Friday morning, he reported on his blog that Washington, D.C. has given him a free license to use their maps, and he has taken down his Chicago map while he awaits word on a license, which he said "is looking pretty good."

7 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

Al Swearengen said:

member since 10 May 2005 with 339 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:21 pm

Are they really copyrighted? I thought that such items from government agencies were not copyrightable. Despite what the agency says if tax money goes into it, then it public domain. Any lawyers here willing to make a comment?

I remember a few years ago where some guy was taking munciple code and putting it on a CD to hand out for free. If I remember correctly it was just the building/construction codes. The city and a vendor were ticked because they charged big bucks for a printed set of code. I wonder how that turned out.

Quote this post ↓

Al Swearengen said:

member since 10 May 2005 with 339 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:54 pm

I did a quick web search on copyright and government publications and found a lot but I also did not find a lot. This is an increadibly complex subject.

I found a mention on a university web site that Federal Publications are not copyrightable, but I could not get a reference to the actual law so I don't know if the statement is correct or not.

I could not find out if state and local government publications are copyrightable or not.

The jury is still out.

Quote this post ↓

Small White Car said:

member since 02 Jul 2004 with 1960 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:32 pm

It's perfectly fine to make your own map...that's what this guy's done since this happened. What's protected is the actual artwork that they put out. They made that and they own it and they can decide who gets to use it in what way.

I don't see what's wrong with that. The information is free, it's the work they paid their graphic designers to do that's not.

Remember, a subway is not like a police department where they get all of their money from taxes. Even if they get a fair amount from taxes they still charge to ride it and have to make a lot of choices on their own.

But hey, even if they WERE run totally by the goernment I think they should have that right. Let's say you start selling T-shirts that use the New York Fire Department logo on them. Does the NYFD have the right to make you stop if they want you to? Or do you get to say "my taxes paid for it, I can make money from it!" I would side with the FD in that case.

Quote this post ↓

Biff said:

member since 08 Apr 2004 with 1479 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:39 pm

I think its stupid. It's not like they make money from maps! They make money when people can figure out where the transit stops are and actually pay to ride! You'd think they would want as many people as possible to have maps with them at all times. But hey what do I know?

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:42 pm

Biff,

a consideration other than quantity is quality. They want control so they can make sure you're not putting out incorrect information - hence the keep it up to date clause mentioned. transit companies & authorities spend a lot of money trying to inform their passengers about their networks, but it has to be quality information or it's less than useless.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:40 am

As a cartographer, I'd like to point out one thing that Biff must have missed from the article. Part of the agreement at least one of the cities is asking for is that the maps be maintained and kept up to date. Can you imagine the money they'd lose from riders trying to travel to a non-existant station and not seeing it on their maps? So yes, they do make money from the maps. If they are updated, they'll make more money. D.C.'s leniency probably is due to the fact the Metro has no plans to expand for at least another 5 years. Each time though maps are updated, a cartographer has to sit down and decide what to put on the map and what to leave out, and how to put it on the map. Someone has to pay them to do it. And with subway systems these days frequently following London's Underground map's design of having all bends in the routes use a specific angle for neatness' sake, fitting in new routes frequently means redesigning the whole map so that they will still be legible. The beauty of that design is that it doesn't have to be to scale. Take a class in cartography before making a statement like "It's not like they make money from maps!" Don't forget many subway systems are not run by the city, but by a private organization with coordination from the city.

Quote this post ↓

Al Swearengen said:

member since 10 May 2005 with 339 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Sun Oct 02, 2005 10:43 am

Guest wrote:
As a cartographer, I'd like to point out one thing that Biff must have missed from the article. Part of the agreement at least one of the cities is asking for is that the maps be maintained and kept up to date. Can you imagine the money they'd lose from riders trying to travel to a non-existant station and not seeing it on their maps? So yes, they do make money from the maps. If they are updated, they'll make more money. D.C.'s leniency probably is due to the fact the Metro has no plans to expand for at least another 5 years. Each time though maps are updated, a cartographer has to sit down and decide what to put on the map and what to leave out, and how to put it on the map. Someone has to pay them to do it. And with subway systems these days frequently following London's Underground map's design of having all bends in the routes use a specific angle for neatness' sake, fitting in new routes frequently means redesigning the whole map so that they will still be legible. The beauty of that design is that it doesn't have to be to scale. Take a class in cartography before making a statement like "It's not like they make money from maps!" Don't forget many subway systems are not run by the city, but by a private organization with coordination from the city.

Keeping the maps updated is very important. San Diego had to change their bus routes after 911 because some routes had stops inside military bases. Now they stop outside the gates and driver around the base.

Transit authorities could issue iPod and PDA compatible maps. However, there would be a montary cost to that and many local governments are in money trouble, San Diego is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Question Guest. Since you are a cartographer do you have any info to share about copyrights and city transit maps?

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.