Student Projects:Database Protection:Conclusion

Back to our Main Project Page

Intro to Conclusion (collaborative -- everyone pitch in)

We've examined a number of forms that database protection has taken and may take in the future, in both the US and the EU. Each of these implementations has its good and bad points.

In many ways, these good and bad points are basically hypothetical, however, consideration of the EU directive and the HIPAA have given us real life examples of what some potential protection mechanisms may result in. It is of paramount importance that these real world examples are considered as database protection is further developed.

David's stuff here

As we have discussed, the various avenues for database protection represent varying degrees of protection. Copyright-like protection offers the most drastic protection while extension of "hot news" case law offers less protection than does imitation of copyright more but provides more specific coverage than the existing law.

It is interesting to note that the two most current proposed bills in Congress each represent a specific approach considered above. HR 3872 embodies the extension of the hot news case law while HR 3261 represents the more drastic, copyright-like protection. Not surprisingly, it seems that HR 3872 (the less drastic approach) is gathering more support.

(Damon's stuff)

The EU's Database Directive has come under fire from many groups concerned about its effects. Libraries are concerned that it may prevent them from preserving data and making it available to the public. Scientists fear that the Directive keeps them from making use of and republishing data in their research. Based on the letter of the Directive as it stands today, these concerns are well-founded.

However, recent case law has given these groups some hope that the EU's highest court feels that the Directive's protection goes too far. Also, official analyses of the Directive point out some flaws that may well be addressed when the EU meets formally in 2006 to discuss amending the Directive. Though the Directive currently presents some very real concerns, some of its most drastic provisions may not be around forever.

(Don's stuff)

Database protection as implemented by HIPAA is being seen by clinical researchers as an additional cost of doing business. Ethical researchers understand the aim of HIPAA but its implementation confounds the already difficult task of conducting publicly funded clinical trials. They feel that protections in place prior to the implementation of HIPAA were adequately protecting patient privacy and that the additional regulations imposed by HIPAA have little real value in this regard. It seems evident that while HIPAA may provide some future benefit, the researcher sees little if any benefit currently. This has left the researcher with a mainly negative opinion of HIPAA as in his mind the costs far exceed the benefits.

Elijah's and Charistel's stuff here

Database protection is a debatable subject. There are many entities such as Lexis Nexis and the Nasdaq who are for sui generis protection. There are also those such as Google and Amazon.com who are against it. Both sides for sui generis have their pros and their cons, but where to draw to that line of protection and availability is still unclear.

On the one hand, the benefit of easy accessibility would allow for an advancement in “Open science” and on the other hand, more protection would decrease chances of databases from being misused, such as the stolen source code of Half-Life 2.

Conclusion of Conclusion (collaborative -- everyone pitch in)

Several pieces of current and proposed database protection legislation make it very difficult for scientists and other groups to perform their work. These kinds of database protection have enjoyed some favor in recent years.

The opposition to the most extreme kinds of protection is making itself heard in Europe, and support for such strong protection may be weakening somewhat there -- Europe may well be heading for a more balanced position. At the same time, relatively new existing legislation, and proposed legislation, may bring the United States to a situation much like that of Europe whether such new legislation is really necessary or not. In this very new area of government intervention, each country is still in the process of finding the right amount of power to place in the hands of the owners of databases.