Techdirt writes often about the benefits of openness and sharing. One area that is increasingly at the forefront are open data - for example, for a while both the U.S. and the UK have big plans to open stores of data held by their respective governments , and other countries are rapidly joining the club. But amid the enthusiasm for such projects, it is easy to get carried away, and to accept the idea of ??open data indiscriminately. This is what makes this fascinating blog entitled "View as a fan" of Tom Slee as valuable, because he says what he considers a serious problem with the open data initiatives:

The point of this post is to draw attention to the open government data lookalike - the shadow of commercial interests are civic hackers everywhere they go, the new markets that inevitably arise from the ruins of the old - and its dangers. I'm suspicious of this double: more than most supporters of open data, which tend to use the language of entrepreneurship and innovation when it comes to companies working with open data, and instead new companies with business models that seek to replace aging, and who often have commercial use as a complement to civilian use.

Your message gives some examples, such as developers rich and powerful, with new records scanned to expel the poor from the land he had lived for many years . More generally, you see the Open Data projects undermine traditional knowledge in the memory of local people. Ultimately, he feared that open data can not delegate this authority.

is an important place, as it calls into question many assumptions about the data and open unrecognized value. But as David cut out a message as detailed written response, Slee focuses too much on the negative aspects of open data, and fails to mention the problems

closed

data:


, I want to emphasize, however, there is no discussion on the costs of closed data - or powerful interests that reflect the data from the open market, free look-alike - who wish to keep this way. Without recognition of the enormous inequalities embedded in the status quo where government data is controlled by government agents, and more often than not, are sold to those who can pay for it. I have no doubt that open data will create new winners and losers - but do not claim that the status quo is not compatible with many winners and losers is created. Our starting point is not neutral.