How is the RR "premium" database for MA?

Status
Not open for further replies.

raisindot

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
244
I've pretty much programmed my PSR500 by manually entering frequencies I find here and elsewhere and copying from others Win500 files.

Frankly, I've hesitated about upgrading my membership to premium status to have files downloaded because 1) I'm cheap and 2) The PSR500 manual promotes the RR databases prepgrammed into the '500 VScanner, but the one for NE is absolutely pathetic. Most of the frequencies are for CT. There are only three talkgroups for MA; one for Worcester, one for Cambridge (that doesn't work) and a third. No MA state police. No Boston municipal. No conventional frequencies at all.

I assume that the frequencies in the Vscanner represent some kind of compromise between GRE and RR, maybe to save memory space, so I guess I'm wondering whether I'm going to have a better scanning experience using RR's downloadable files rather than my own? I know this is subjective, but any POV would be helpful.

Suzie
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,489
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
Simply go to the RRDB for the area you are looking for and see what it contains.

http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/

You can see beforehand exactly what's in the database. If you don't like what it is in there and don't think it's something you should pay for the opportunity to use to program your scanner via download, then simply don't purchase a premium subscription.

But all the info that would be available for you to download if you bought a premium membership is also available for you to manually view beforehand so that you can make the decision.

Mike
 

raisindot

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
244
mtindor said:
Simply go to the RRDB for the area you are looking for and see what it contains.

http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/

You can see beforehand exactly what's in the database. If you don't like what it is in there and don't think it's something you should pay for the opportunity to use to program your scanner via download, then simply don't purchase a premium subscription.

But all the info that would be available for you to download if you bought a premium membership is also available for you to manually view beforehand so that you can make the decision.

Mike
Thanks. I have looked at the MA database and have entered many frequencies from it manually. However, it's unclear as to what happens if I "upgrade" to premium and then download files directly to my PSR500. Does it download ever since frequency in the MA database? Does it create a VScanner? Does it do it in a Win500 or other software file?

Suzie
 

unleashedff248

Massachusetts DBA
Database Admin
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
50
Location
Sandwich, MA
I often download directly from the DB into my BCT-15. Most things work out well, especially conventional. Trunking downloading saves LOADS of time, but you will probably need to go through and edit alpha tags.

As for ScanCapeCod, it's a good resource. I'm a new DB admin for MA and I'm working on getting everything up to date. Most of the information (>90%) is good and up to date.

If you find it's not up to date, submit the changes. The ScanCapeCod administrator is also very active here in the forums. Remember, this isn't a competition, it's cooperation. If you see something new posted on SCC, please submit it here. It's difficult for admins to keep track of everything. We need your help!
 

N1BHH

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
1,843
Location
Jackson Square, East Weymouth, MA.
I like the initiative of inputting frequencies manually. That way you actually don't have to rely upon a computer software program when you want to put in a new frequency on the fly. When I program my scanners I don't put all the talk groups in because I want to be able to hear them, I leave the bank open, when a talk group activates, I save it and later edit it and place the proper tag on it.

Here's a link to help explain the Premium membership: http://www.radioreference.com/apps/subscription/

It's also best when posting information to recognize the source.
 
Last edited:

KC1UA

Scan New England Guru
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
1,586
Location
Cape Cod, Massachusetts
unleashedff248 said:
Remember, this isn't a competition, it's cooperation. If you see something new posted on SCC, please submit it here. It's difficult for admins to keep track of everything. We need your help!
I couldn't agree more. I'm a DB Admin here as well, but I don't spend enough time here helping out, unfortunately. I do think I have the Cape Cod section of the data here pretty well up to snuff, which is my area of specialty of course, seeing how I live smack in the middle of it.

The RR database has been incredibly helpful to me. I use it extensively to set up files for a yearly trip my wife and I take to Florida. The small price to pay to be able to download this data directly into a program is a great deal and a HUGE timesaver (and finger saver).
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
If you see something new posted on SCC, please submit it here.[\QUOTE]

That would be OK as long as the guy who owns SCC consents to it. Taking information from other websites and submitting it to RRDB without permission violates those webmasters' rights and copyright law.

If I think info from my website should be in RRDB, then I will submit it - and I have done so with certain digital talkgroups on a new P25 system in my area.
 

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,275
Location
San Antonio, TX
DaveNF2G said:
That would be OK as long as the guy who owns SCC consents to it. Taking information from other websites and submitting it to RRDB without permission violates those webmasters' rights and copyright law.
Dave, that's not true. Factual information cannot be copyrighted... while I agree it makes good sense to give credit back to sources and in most cases it's not "nice" to copy line for line word for word information from another compiled work, it doesn't violate the law.
 

KC1UA

Scan New England Guru
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
1,586
Location
Cape Cod, Massachusetts
I'm not concerned about it, but I do appreciate the suggestion. It is nice indeed to have the source credited, but the information is there for the taking; as earlier stated it's cooperation, not competition...and ultimately it is a labor of love and a hobby. The databases here are of outstanding value in my case, and are a pleasure to contribute to. They have made my overland trips all the more pleasurable thanks to the ease of programming they provide.

Bottom line raisindot, well worth the short $$.
 

unleashedff248

Massachusetts DBA
Database Admin
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
50
Location
Sandwich, MA
Yes, it is good to credit the source. I only said that because I know how active Scott is here and how much work he does on SCC. It's an excellent source, especially the Wiki pages. I'm working on getting some of that information over here as I can confirm the loggings. So far I haven't found anything on the SCC wiki to be incorrect.

There's been a lot of talk recently about "stealing" information from other web sites. I think Lindsay's post explains it all. But furthermore, aren't we all attempting to accomplish the same goal? I wish we all worked well together to make this easier and better for everyone.

But yeah, the premium subscription to me is priceless. :p
 
D

DaveNF2G

Guest
Lindsay's explanation of copyright law is incomplete. A compilation is copyrighted. Any work a person puts into presenting information, even if the underlying data are in the public domain (such as FCC license data) is protected by law.

Besides that, my website and others like it do not rely on FCC data for frequency info. The listings are based on monitoring and analysis by myself and other individuals. None of what is published on my site is in the public domain - it is all protected by copyright law.
 

PeterGV

K1PGV, ScannerCast author
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
753
Location
Mont Vernon, NH
<QUOTE>
it is all protected by copyright law
</QUOTE>

I'm not a lawyer. I do not even play one on TV. But I *am* a software developer that gets involved quite a bit in Intellectual Property issues. So I know a little about this topic.

The format and particular items in the compilation, taken together, may be copyrighted. That is the "expression" of the underlying idea or data.

However, as Lindsey said, the underlying idea or data cannot be copyrighted.

A book of phone numbers, comprising only people named McGee, and formatted 3 columns to a page can be copyrighted. That's an expression. The fact that John McGee's phone number is 212.555.1212 -- even if this fact appears only in the copyrighted work and this information was taken directly from the copyrighted work -- is not subject to copyright. It's a fact, underlying data. And you can't copyright that.

Now... If you had a web site that had some nifty information, nothing would stop you from creating a restriction on your web site that says, as a condition of use, that users may not disclose the information that they discover on your web site. That would be valid. But I suspect your recourse for those who don't follow this rule is probably limited to banning them from further use of your site.

de Peter K1PGV
 

garys

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
4,644
Location
Eastern MA
PeterGV said:
I'm not a lawyer. I do not even play one on TV. But I *am* a software developer that gets involved quite a bit in Intellectual Property issues. So I know a little about this topic.

The format and particular items in the compilation, taken together, may be copyrighted. That is the "expression" of the underlying idea or data.

de Peter K1PGV
Peter, I don't think anyone is arguing this point. I borrow data from other websites in some cases. However I do two things that are the point here. First, I always ask permission of the website owner. Second, I always credit the website owner or other contributor unless they specifically tell me that they don't want their names mentioned. Here is the exact wording from my website regarding using content.

Distribution

I’ve stopped producing versions in Word or PDF format and this is now a web based document only. The document is free to anyone for non commercial use. You may post links on websites, download and convert to other formats, reference the document, provided that you credit me as the source.
Copyright © 1998-2007 by Gary Saffer

Thanks and credits

In addition to my work, this guide includes information from numerous scanner enthusiasts in the eastern and central Massachusetts areas. My thanks for their contributions to the guide.

I will periodically update this guide as information demands and time permits. To send updates to me you can Email me at (garys2@comcast.net). Use the subject line "Scanner Guide", so I know what the topic is.
Pretty straightforward and very non restrictive. At least I think so.

Gary
 

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,275
Location
San Antonio, TX
DaveNF2G said:
Lindsay's explanation of copyright law is incomplete. A compilation is copyrighted. Any work a person puts into presenting information, even if the underlying data are in the public domain (such as FCC license data) is protected by law.

Besides that, my website and others like it do not rely on FCC data for frequency info. The listings are based on monitoring and analysis by myself and other individuals. None of what is published on my site is in the public domain - it is all protected by copyright law.
Sorry Dave, but I am going to have to categorically disagree with your assertion here.

The United States Supreme Court, in the case Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, ruled that "information" is not subject to copyright, and neither is the collection of a set of information. The creative aspects are and can be subject to copyright, however Frequency, System, and talkgroup raw data are prime examples of information and are not subject to copyright - just as phone number, address, and name are not subject to copyright and ruled in the case. End of story, period. The court case is a well documented and principal example of this type situation and definitely applies here.

What would be subject to copyright is the creative aspects of how the *information* was "presented" - i.e. HTML, tables, order, display, user comments, and other creative works.

So what this means is that if you are presenting facts on your pages, then those factual pieces of information are not subject to copyright. Your process in which you present those facts, order, decisions on whether to include or not, and creative works, are subject to copyright.

Further example... a recipe is a definition of a process, and not subject to copyright, however the words to describe it are, so republishing verbatim a recipe book is a copyright violation, rewriting the complete set of recipes in one's one words would not be. To take this to our example, if I "copied" whole pages of your site and reposted here on our site (html, your words, etc) - then we could be held liable for copyright infringement. If I took every single talkgroup, frequency, and system information set from your site and posted here in our database with my formatting and creative process... well, it's fair game.... it might not be the "nice" thing to do, but legally I would be protected.

...and this is the litmus test I have applied to the data here. I don't mind it at all if someone decides to build a web page of data from this site. By all means, go for it. I have drawn the line twice and approached folks to cease and desist... one who was downloading PDFs from the site packaging on CDROM and selling as a service on ebay, and another that mirrored the site (all HTML, code etc) on a remote server. Otherwise, and I'll make this clear, steal away on the data.... it was "user" generated content and you are free to repost wherever you want.

And Dave, really, the reality is that you DO at some point rely on FCC data (or your submitters do), and you rely on submitters that probably at times rely on other sources. The copyright argument on radio communications data is ludicrous and a lousy one. One just doesn't build a database from scratch with no involvement from FCC data and just frequency search ranges. You review public records, you talk to public safety officials who provide agency data, and then we all do some sleuthing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top