Laserfiche WebLink
<br />A Study of GIS fo, the Colo'~ OeIlartment of Natural Resources <br /> <br />Octobe, 9. 1992 <br /> <br />information policymakers. The debate is currently focused, primarily, on federal electronic <br />information. As state and local governments develop sophisticated information resources <br />such as GIS, attention will turn to their systems also. <br /> <br />The debate centers on the respective roles of the private and public sectors in providing <br />electronic information products and services based on government-held data. Information <br />providers in the private sector, for example, argue for a minimal government role in the <br />dissemination of information products, preferring the government to make its electronic <br />information available on a wholesale basis for the marginal cost of reproduction. They <br />want the private sector free to add value to government information and otherwise be the <br />primary distributor of government electronic information at the retail level. These <br />companies oppose user fees for government data and the marketing of information-based <br />products and services by government agencies. <br /> <br />Other groups also oppose user fees for government information, but these groups are also <br />wary of the private sector and the role it might play in disseminating government <br />information. These groups, primarily representing the library community and citizens' <br />groups, think that governments should take the initiative in making their data freely <br />available to the public. Government dissemination, in their view, would also include <br />making electronic inforination available through libraries and other public means. These <br />groups are concerned that private sector control of government information dissemination <br />will lead to higher prices for information and elimination of those information services <br />which are not sufficiently profitable. They believe that if the dissemination of government <br />infonnation is privatized, less information will be'made available at a higher price. <br /> <br />There is a third side to the debate, however. wiih increasing frequency, state inalocal <br />governments are developing geographic information systems and other sophisticated <br />information resources. They want to impose fees for the sale of products and services <br />derived from these systems. The fees which these governments seek to impose may range <br />from modest fees, representing little more than cost of duplication and some minor charges <br />for system maintenance, to user fees designed to return a portion of system development <br />costs. <br /> <br />When state and local governments attempt to impose these fees, they often discover that the <br />applicable law constrains their options. In Colorado, as this report points out, there are a <br />number of laws applicable to this course of conduct and related actions. Many of these <br />provisions are not precise or clear as to the extent of their reach, nor are t!tey clear as to the <br />order of precedence when differing provisions clash or when different methods of <br />interpretation are possible. This is truly one of the gray areas of the law and will remain so <br />as the courts and legislatures discover more about the technology - particularly, the <br />commercial viability of relational database technology and potential use of government <br />owned information management systems. <br /> <br />The problem is made more difficult because the legal framework under which questions of <br />access to government information is decided, generally, does not reflect advances in <br /> <br />431.7 <br /> <br />PlanGraphics. Inc. <br /> <br />19 <br />