Azərbaycanca
Deutsch
English
Français
Русский
ภาษาไทย
Türkçe
Українська
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
County of Santa Clara v. California First Amendment Coalition, 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301 (2009), was a case before the California Courts of Appeal dealing with the ability of a local California agency to limit the disclosure of, or require license agreements for, public records and data requested under the California Public Records Act (CPRA).
| County of Santa Clara v. California First Amendment Coalition | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | California Court of Appeal, Sixth District |
| Full case name | County of Santa Clara, et al. v. The Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California First Amendment Coalition |
| Citations | 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301 89 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374 |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from | Santa Clara County Superior Court |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | , , |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | McAdams |
| Laws applied | |
| California Public Records Act | |
The court found that as public records, there was "no statutory basis either for copyrighting the GIS basemap or for conditioning its release on a licensing agreement" under United States copyright law because state freedom of information laws preclude a state agency’s reliance on federal copyright unless state law specifically permits it.
History
The case dealt with a public records request by the California First Amendment Coalition for GIS "basemap" data held by Santa Clara County, California. The trial court concluded that the county must release the records and could not place any restrictions on their use. The county then appealed to the California Courts of Appeal, which upheld the lower court's decision, and published its opinion. The county also unsuccessfully attempted to have the opinion depublished by the Supreme Court of California.
The county made three arguments. The county claimed the records were "protected critical infrastructure information" and exempted from release by the federal Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002, that disclosure was exempted under the CPRA under the "catch all" exemption, and that it had a federal copyright in the basemap, arguing that copyright protection authorized the county to condition release of records, under freedom of information laws like the CPRA, with restrictions on the requester’s use of the records or sharing of the records with others.
Decision
The court rejected each of the county's arguments:
- The court rejected that the records were exempted from release as "protected critical infrastructure information" under the Critical Infrastructure Information Act, as the county was only the provider of such resources, not the receiver, and hence the CII was irrelevant.
- The court rejected the CPRA "catch all" exemption claim, concluding that the "public interest in disclosure outweighs the public interest in nondisclosure.”
- The court stated that as "a matter of first impression in California" there is "no statutory basis either for copyrighting the GIS basemap or for conditioning its release on a licensing agreement" and order that the "record thus must be disclosed as provided in the CPRA, without any such conditions or limitations" and ruled that it considered the general case of "interplay between copyright law and California's public records law, with the result that unrestricted disclosure is required".
See also
- Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner (2004)
- , 261 F.3d 179 (2001)
- Sierra Club v. County of Orange, 57 Cal.4th 157 (2013)
References
- County of Santa Clara v. California First Amendment Coalition, 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301, 1337 (2009).
- County of Santa Clara, 170 Cal. App. 4th at 1335.
External links
- Text of County of Santa Clara v. California First Amendment Coalition, 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301 (2009) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Leagle Wayback Machine (slip opinion)
- Santa Clara County Map – SCCMap
Author: www.NiNa.Az
Publication date:
wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library, article, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games, mobile, phone, android, ios, apple, mobile phone, samsung, iphone, xiomi, xiaomi, redmi, honor, oppo, nokia, sonya, mi, pc, web, computer
This article has multiple issues Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page Learn how and when to remove these messages This article relies excessively on references to primary sources Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources Find sources County of Santa Clara v California First Amendment Coalition news newspapers books scholar JSTOR July 2020 Learn how and when to remove this message This article relies largely or entirely on a single source Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources Find sources County of Santa Clara v California First Amendment Coalition news newspapers books scholar JSTOR June 2022 Learn how and when to remove this message County of Santa Clara v California First Amendment Coalition 170 Cal App 4th 1301 2009 was a case before the California Courts of Appeal dealing with the ability of a local California agency to limit the disclosure of or require license agreements for public records and data requested under the California Public Records Act CPRA County of Santa Clara v California First Amendment CoalitionCourtCalifornia Court of Appeal Sixth DistrictFull case nameCounty of Santa Clara et al v The Superior Court of Santa Clara County California First Amendment CoalitionCitations170 Cal App 4th 1301 89 Cal Rptr 3d 374Case historyAppealed fromSanta Clara County Superior CourtCourt membershipJudges sitting Case opinionsDecision byMcAdamsLaws appliedCalifornia Public Records Act The court found that as public records there was no statutory basis either for copyrighting the GIS basemap or for conditioning its release on a licensing agreement under United States copyright law because state freedom of information laws preclude a state agency s reliance on federal copyright unless state law specifically permits it HistoryThe case dealt with a public records request by the California First Amendment Coalition for GIS basemap data held by Santa Clara County California The trial court concluded that the county must release the records and could not place any restrictions on their use The county then appealed to the California Courts of Appeal which upheld the lower court s decision and published its opinion The county also unsuccessfully attempted to have the opinion depublished by the Supreme Court of California The county made three arguments The county claimed the records were protected critical infrastructure information and exempted from release by the federal Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 that disclosure was exempted under the CPRA under the catch all exemption and that it had a federal copyright in the basemap arguing that copyright protection authorized the county to condition release of records under freedom of information laws like the CPRA with restrictions on the requester s use of the records or sharing of the records with others DecisionThe court rejected each of the county s arguments The court rejected that the records were exempted from release as protected critical infrastructure information under the Critical Infrastructure Information Act as the county was only the provider of such resources not the receiver and hence the CII was irrelevant The court rejected the CPRA catch all exemption claim concluding that the public interest in disclosure outweighs the public interest in nondisclosure The court stated that as a matter of first impression in California there is no statutory basis either for copyrighting the GIS basemap or for conditioning its release on a licensing agreement and order that the record thus must be disclosed as provided in the CPRA without any such conditions or limitations and ruled that it considered the general case of interplay between copyright law and California s public records law with the result that unrestricted disclosure is required See alsoMicrodecisions Inc v Skinner 2004 261 F 3d 179 2001 Sierra Club v County of Orange 57 Cal 4th 157 2013 ReferencesCounty of Santa Clara v California First Amendment Coalition 170 Cal App 4th 1301 1337 2009 County of Santa Clara 170 Cal App 4th at 1335 External linksText of County of Santa Clara v California First Amendment Coalition 170 Cal App 4th 1301 2009 is available from CourtListener Google Scholar Leagle Wayback Machine slip opinion Santa Clara County Map SCCMap