First a New Statesman competition nomination, and now Infoworld is writing about the campaign.

In an article published today, it looks at what we’re after.

Some interesting points:

There has been little response to the campaign from the government. A Cabinet Office spokesperson told IWR that the government welcomed the discussion, but was not reviewing its public sector information policy.

Sure, but it’s early days. We have not yet begun to fight. Also:

A campaign blog has generated a lively debate, including the revelation by civil servant Chris Hancox that British citizens pay repeatedly for the same OS data when applying for planning permission.

Hancox has revealed a complex web of payments whereby taxpayer funded local government bodies pay for OS map information as part of planning applications, with planning authorities paying again for similar OS map data. In all, eight different payments are made to the OS, according to Hancox.

We’ll be making the address issue our news story for next week. Any light anyone can throw on it (such as where you can get the raw data, as one is meant to be able to, as you can from the British Oceanographic Data Centre) is welcome; as is any experience of being blocked. (You can post anonymously, or email me.)

The following posts may be related...(the database guesses):
• How the Danes get it right with address data (30 November 2006; score: 25.24%)
• Times article echoes Free Our Data campaign (20 September 2006; score: 25.2%)
• Is the campaign won? What do you think? (4 June 2010; score: 21.92%)
• A national address gazette - but copyright problems persist (19 April 2008; score: 20.36%)
• Paying twice for data? Through your council, you might be paying EIGHT times (21 March 2006; score: 18.4%)