The Connecticut Supreme Court recently addressed a significant issue regarding public records and copyright law in the case of Pictometry International Corporation v. Freedom of Information Commission, Docket No. SC18724. The court ruled on January 29, 2013, determining whether public records protected by federal copyright law fall under the Freedom of Information Act's exemptions.

This ruling impacts how public agencies handle requests for copyrighted materials, particularly in cases where individuals seek access to government-held records that are also subject to copyright protections. The decision is crucial for both public agencies and individuals requesting information, as it clarifies the extent to which copyrighted materials can be disclosed.

Background

Pictometry International Corporation, a private company, specializes in aerial photographic services and holds copyrights on various images and associated data. The company had a contract with the Connecticut Department of Information Technology (DOIT), allowing state agencies, including the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), to use its copyrighted materials for governmental purposes.

The dispute began when a man named Stephen Whitaker requested copies of Pictometry's aerial images and data from the DEP. The DEP initially denied the request, citing the federal copyright exemption under the Freedom of Information Act. However, they indicated that Whitaker could obtain the images for a fee of $25 per image, as outlined in the licensing agreement with Pictometry.

Whitaker then filed a complaint with the Freedom of Information Commission, arguing that the DEP had violated the act by not providing the requested materials. The commission ruled that the DEP was required to provide the images at a minimal cost but did not need to disclose the associated data. Both Pictometry and the DEP appealed the commission's decision, leading to this case.

The Ruling

The Connecticut Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Rogers and joined by Justices Norcott, Palmer, Zarella, Eveleigh, and Harper, ultimately ruled that the commission had improperly ordered the DEP to provide the images without first determining whether Whitaker wanted them stripped of the associated metadata. The court emphasized that the commission failed to consider whether providing the images in that format was feasible and whether it posed a public safety risk.

The court ruled, "the commission improperly ordered the DEP to provide copies of the images without first determining whether Whitaker wanted copies of the images stripped of the associated data."

The court also concluded that if the commission determines that Whitaker is entitled to the images, the copying must comply with the licensing agreement and federal copyright law, including the payment of the $25 fee per image.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for how public agencies handle requests for copyrighted materials. It clarifies that federal copyright law is indeed a "federal law" for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act's exemptions. This means that public agencies must consider copyright protections when responding to requests for information.

Furthermore, the ruling emphasizes the importance of determining whether requested materials can be provided in a way that does not violate copyright laws or pose safety risks. The decision sets a precedent that public agencies must carefully evaluate requests involving copyrighted materials and ensure compliance with both state and federal laws.

What's Next

The case has been remanded to the Freedom of Information Commission for further proceedings to address the issues raised by the court. This includes determining whether Whitaker wants the images and whether the DEP can feasibly provide them without the associated metadata. The ruling indicates that there may be additional hearings or decisions to clarify the handling of such requests in the future.