Call/response on climate monitoring station records an opportunity for open data?

Nature’s editorial of 2 December called for various measures to make it easier for climate scientists to produce the analyses that are used to model the world’s climate. These underpin the current thinking on the probability and effects of a warmer climate in the near future, and the essential ingredient is data. According to the editorial the data is subject to international agreements on its publication. So it is good to see an announcement from the Met Office on 5 December to the effect that data from 5000 temperature monitor stations should be available from ‘early next week’. The agreement has been influenced by the World Meteorological Organisation, the UN’s weather body.

To a layman, the two obvious questions are how accessible, and how useful, this ‘subset of the full HadCRUT record of global temperatures’ will be.

The Digital Economy Bill: a letter to Lord Puttnam

Dear Lord Puttnam,

In response to the proposed Digital Economy Bill, on 25 November you said:

'I also add a broad welcome to the proposals that throw a spanner in the proliferation of online piracy.' [1]

I agree that legislation is appropriate in an area that is forming an increasingly significant part of our working and social lives.

I also strongly support the concept and practice of copyright as a pillar of the economy, although I reject the somewhat natural urge to extend the terms. I support copyright because I know that it gives me the ability to allow people to benefit from my work under the terms of permissive licences (thus ultimately benefiting myself), and because I recognise that unregulated copying will undermine a creator's ability to support themselves -- which ultimately means that our society in its current economic form will not be able to create new and original work in any field.

But I feel that to describe the proposals for curbing piracy [the distribution of material subject to copyright without permission] as 'throwing a spanner' is about the best that can be said for the accuracy and effect of the proposed Bill. From what I have read it seems as though there will be very damaging outcomes from the application of its clumsy provisions, but ones which may not harm the offenders at all.

Perhaps your statement tacitly acknowledges that the Bill in question needs much more work in this area. I would urge you to take a look at some of the objections listed by the Open Rights Group before you decide [2]

Yours sincerely,

Ben Weiner

References:
[1]http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2009-11-25a.377.5&s=digital+economy+speaker%3A13699#g417.0

[2] http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2009/write-to-the-lords-today

Lord Puttnam, former film maker, is deputy chairman of Channel 4.

Edit: reformat due to abysmal HTML from Blogger :-(