Rick Santorum (R-PA) introduced National Weather Services Duties Act of 2005 (S.786), which will prohibit the National Weather Service from providing data or services that compete with weather data products from the private sector.
(b) COMPETITION WITH PRIVATE SECTOR- The Secretary of Commerce shall not provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be provided by the private sector unless–
(1) the Secretary determines that the private sector is unwilling or unable to provide such product or service; or
(2) the United States Government is obligated to provide such product or service under international aviation agreements to provide meteorological services and exchange meteorological information.”
The AP reports: Santorum’s bill would change National Weather Service offerings: “The bill would protect the 14 private weather service companies in Pennsylvania — including AccuWeather in State College, Pa., Santorum spokeswoman Chrissy Shott said. AccuWeather, which says it employs about 340 people, provides weather data to a variety of outlets — including media organizations such as The Associated Press.”
By releasing data for only the cost of reproduction, the US government stimulates innovative services in the weather field. In a February article in the Financial Times, James Boyle discusses the benefits the public has received from this free access to weather data: Public information wants to be free
The United States makes complete weather data available to anyone at the cost of reproduction. If the superb government websites and data feeds aren’t enough, for the price of a box of blank DVD’s you can have the entire history of weather records across the continental US. European countries, by contrast, typically claim government copyright over weather data and often require the payment of substantial fees. Which approach is better? If I had to suggest one article on this subject it would be the magisterial study by Peter Weiss called “Borders in Cyberspace,” published by the National Academies of Science. Weiss suggests that the US approach generates far more social wealth. True, the information is initially provided for free, but a thriving private weather industry has sprung up which takes the publicly funded data as its raw material and then adds value to it. The US weather risk management industry, for example, is ten times bigger than the European one, employing more people, producing more valuable products, generating more social wealth.
When the public sector makes available scientific data for free or at cost, everyone wins. See State Support for Information Access. Public data is a public good. By allowing the state to provide more data, the private sector will likely become more innovative. A state-supported monopoly leads to stagnation, not progress and innovation.
At what price does Senator Santorum put the benefits of a donor ahead of the public interest? Ezra Klein estimates $7,500: Cheap as Well as Nasty.
Elsewhere:
Between Lawyers: Chilling Effect on Frost Forecasts
Gothamist: Wither the Weather?
Copyfight’s Donna Wentworth also recalled Boyle’s FT article: Help Break the IP Stupidity Pact
