It is USDF members' data.
Whatever. Centerline was using the USDF data, for crying out loud!
Firstly, CenterlineScores.com is built on publicly available competition results data. While it primarily uses USDF.org results, the same data is also freely available to anyone with a web-browser from USEF.org, FVD, local show management, GMO websites, etc. Heck, you can get a listing of results right here on the Chronicle and the hard copy version of the magazine lists out every score from every rider at the show.Quote:
The data is not free to the members and should be fully controlled by the USDF.
So, to be very explicitly clear... we are talking about the publicly available results of a public (open to the public) sporting event. These are public facts and "facts" are not copyrightable under US Copyright Law (and Supreme Court precedent).
This is demonstrably false. I have stacks of email from people (including high profile riders, trainers, judges, etc.) thanking me for creating the site and highlighting the fact that it is so incredibly useful. A simple search of this very forum would yield a similar stack of comments from folks who have benefitted from it.Quote:
I can see no benefit to the MEMBERS nor organization by having it free to the general public.
One of the goals in creating the website was to promote accountability and transparency in the sport. We have done that (or at least made a pretty good start). At the end of the day, the results have ALWAYS been public. However, chief among the innovations that CenterlineScores.com brought (and USDFScores.com now attempts to copy) is aggregating that data together, making it searchable and presenting it in a useful and usable way for people researching their own scores (or those of other riders) and researching trainers and/or horses.
While I do think that their blatant screen-for-screen and function-for-function copycat of CenterlineScores is intellectually & creatively lazy (and in my opinion very likely a Copyright infringement for its almost complete reproduction of some sections of the site - even down to the wording of some of the content), it is also a validation.
If "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", then the USDF has just paid me a huge compliment!
One of the questions that the article asks is: "Why would USDF spend its members' money to develop a copy of an already-existing free service?" In the beginning, I would have been thrilled to have been able to put the USDF logo at the top of the site and work WITH USDF. But the USDF chose, instead, to spend a good chunk of its members' money to RE-implement my ideas in their own site. This makes no sense to me and I still, to this day, can't quite understand the motivation behind it. At the very least, I would have expected their own unique "riff" or take on the concept rather than a copycat rip off of mine.