Admiralty charts

[BERT T]

​-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an extract from an article written by .Michael Briant, so I think it's time to start the ball rolling and get rid of another part of Rip Off Britain.

It is very difficult to justify the prices Admiralty Charts charge for their products.
They are able to do this because they 'claim' they, and they alone, own the copyright, almost world wide, to all navigational charts.
The is actually somewhat dishonest and disingenuous.
In the UK, copyright is only protected for 50 years from publication.
The works of Shakespeare, Sheridan and Shaw, Enid Blyton and the Bible are all free to copy, reproduce, sell or use as we please.
What you cannot do is change bits of them, add colour, modernise them, alter the typescript details, then say that the entire work is now your copyright and anybody wanting to copy it, must pay you a fee!
In a few years even Beetles music will be copyright free!

All present day Navigational Marine Charts are based on work that was completed, sometimes hundreds of years ago.

To quote the Admiralty web site:
In 1795, King George III appointed Alexander Dalrymple as the first Hydrographer. The first Admiralty Chart appeared in 1800. The second Hydrographer, Captain Thomas Hurd, 1808-1823. received permission to sell charts to the public, oversaw the production the first chart catalogue. Rear Admiral Sir Francis Beaufort, was appointed in 1829. to expand and improve chart coverage. By the year 1855, the Admiralty Chart Catalogue listed 1,981 charts

Every one of the charts in the 1855 catalogue was out of copyright by 1905! In fact, every chart published in the UK up to 1960, is out of copyright and the information contained in those charts is available to us without copyright fees.

You cannot add ‘colour’ and the position of some buoys and claim it is 'a new work' but this is what the Ǻdmiralty does.

Money is wasted on an extensive web site, staff paid solely to 'protect' copyright and the expansion of an 'empire'. Advertising, extensive colour brochures, stands at boat shows are pointless, because you cannot actually legally buy these products elsewhere. Stamfords etc all pay a substantial copyright fee, in order to be allowed to publish their own editions.

British boat owners are obliged to pay high prices for charts whilst in the USA you can buy the same products at 'normal' commercial rates or make legal copies for a few pence.

Interesting 83.2% of all the merchant ships in the world do NOT use ADMIRALTY CHARTS charts preferring American NOAA US Navy charts. Apparently often a commercial decision.

The 'electronic charts' for our plotters run on software designed by others and the same electronic charts are available in the USA, free of copyright.

BA even claim 'copyright' for the entire Caribbean and much of the world, which is actually nonsense.

I have had correspondence with BA charts, who confirm they use their copyright claims to maintain a monopoly on all charts sold in the UK. They refuse to disclose exactly how much their mark-up is and appear to admit their copyright claim is dubious!
The only legal confirmation the Admiralty have to their copyright ownership, is a rather 'Mickey Mouse' judgement in Malta!....Malta?
In the USA, the government accepts that the original work, done to create all their charts, was finished well over 50 years ago, and allows anybody to access charts, in either paper, electronic form or on the internet - Free of Charge!


If you agree that the Admiralty ‘copyright fee’ and monopoly is unfair then write or email the RYA -

enquiries@rya.org.uk

and request they begin to campaign for the right to publish charts, without copyright fees, as in all other major countries of the world.

Contact your MP via

http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/

and request him to ask them why such extortionate and unfair charges are levied on ordinary people with small boats by a department which contributes nothing to the exchequer except to self fund.

If you have contacts in the boating press then please contact them and ask them to publish details of the unfair price fixing by the ADMIRALTY CHARTS.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Your argument seems so appealing and logical.

Unfortunately it's fundamentally flawed in a number of ways.

Notwithstanding the metaphorical two fingers you will get from the Government and Treasury at the implication they should subsidise the UKHO to enable small boat owners to have cheaper charts (because that's what you are suggesting in reality), perhaps you can ask for the data over 50 years old to be free? Unfortunately I'm interested in all the corrections and new surveys. If you look at the chart and the survey data it's VERY rare or impossible to find a chart where the whole thing is based on data over 50 years old.

Finally and most importantly, I spent some time working with Hydrographers and learned a little about how the UKHO collect data compared with the USA. From those conversations I am always VERY careful about using US charts. They can be OK but thry have no where near the same diligence in the way they process updates to data.

Finally finally, UKHO has to be commercial. If they are pricing themselves out of the market then something will be done.

 

[maxi77]

Your argument seems so appealing and logical.

Unfortunately it's fundamentally flawed in a number of ways.

Notwithstanding the metaphorical two fingers you will get from the Government and Treasury at the implication they should subsidise the UKHO to enable small boat owners to have cheaper charts (because that's what you are suggesting in reality), perhaps you can ask for the data over 50 years old to be free? Unfortunately I'm interested in all the corrections and new surveys. If you look at the chart and the survey data it's VERY rare or impossible to find a chart where the whole thing is based on data over 50 years old.

Finally and most importantly, I spent some time working with Hydrographers and learned a little about how the UKHO collect data compared with the USA. From those conversations I am always VERY careful about using US charts. They can be OK but thry have no where near the same diligence in the way they process updates to data.

Finally finally, UKHO has to be commercial. If they are pricing themselves out of the market then something will be done.

Agreed, and many other countries with chart production capability charge in the same way as the UK does. Also by respecting each others copyright hydrographic data is freely exchanged between hydrographic organisations thus keeping costs to all users to a minimum.

 

[KevO]

A US sailor mate told me that their charts were free to US citizens "because our taxes paid for them to be produced, therefore we already own the rights to use them, they are already ours, why should we buy something we already paid for?"

 

[duncan99210]

A US sailor mate told me that their charts were free to US citizens "because our taxes paid for them to be produced, therefore we already own the rights to use them, they are already ours, why should we buy something we already paid for?"

It is exactly that reason that lies behind the free availability of NOAA charts. NOAA remains a tax payer funded setup and has never had to even break even on its activities. On the other hand the UKHO is a trading agency and has to at least break even if not generate a profit. And don't forget that each edition of a chart is regarded as a new work for the purposes of copyright law, as it has been subject to updating since the previous edition.

 

[oldvarnish]

A US sailor mate told me that their charts were free to US citizens "because our taxes paid for them to be produced, therefore we already own the rights to use them, they are already ours, why should we buy something we already paid for?"

And so all the food that is grown on UK soil should be free because the land of which it grows is already ours?

The obvious answer is no, because what you are really paying for is the cost of production. Likewise with charts: you are paying for ships to go and do surveys, for cartographers to draw the charts, for people to keep them up to date on a daily basis, for people to ensure total accuracy, for people to print and distribute, and shops to store them.

The truth is that paper charts in the US are not free at all. If you go into a chandlery and request a chart, they go online and make a free download of the data. Then they print the chart in the store, and then they charge you for it. About 12 USD seems to ring a bell - cheaper than ours, true, but a poor imitation. In fact, the chandlery I went to in Newport RI suggested I buy a BA chart 'if you needed somethin' really accurate'.

 

[Sea Devil]

Your argument seems so appealing and logical.

Unfortunately it's fundamentally flawed in a number of ways.
Unfortunately I'm interested in all the corrections and new surveys. If you look at the chart and the survey data it's VERY rare or impossible to find a chart where the whole thing is based on data over 50 years old.

Finally and most importantly, I spent some time working with Hydrographers and learned a little about how the UKHO collect data compared with the USA. From those conversations I am always VERY careful about using US charts. They can be OK but thry have no where near the same diligence in the way they process updates to data.

Finally finally, UKHO has to be commercial. If they are pricing themselves out of the market then something will be done.

I amazed to hear that small boat sailors keep all their charts up to date and insert the information from admiralty notices to mariners. Hands up anybody who with more than a few local charts does this! I don't because I have charts for most of the world and it's impracticable. The moment a chart is sold to you either electronically or in hard copy it is out of date. The moment there is a gale off a shallow entrance the chart is out of date but normally the local authority moves the buoyed channel!

When I sailed out of UK waters I mainly used US charts which are indeed copyright free and found they had all the accuracy I required. Basically the hard bits do not move and the use of lighthouses and even buoys are becoming less essential because of GPS and chart plotters. Does anybody sail without a GPS on board? US Charts indeed US charts supplied by tides end for around £3 each are all out of date like my portfolio and contain sufficient information for safe navigation.

Certainly if you are driving a supertanker, aircraft carrier or cruise liner you do indeed need spot on accuracy but why on earth should British small boat owners, subsidise and pay the salaries of a load of 'officials' who simply want to preserve their jobs. The copyright element of Admiralty charts is quite simply used for that purpose.

 

[ianj99]

So how is it that the electronic versions supplied with Plotter software such as Belfield's Chart Plotter, Sea Clear, (ARCS) Polarview (AVCS) cost about £30 for all 800 UK, Eire, & Channel charts? They don't expire, and the updates are about the same cost. Can't just be savings in the expensive paper costs or that the electronic versions are usually supplied with a "not for navigation" disclaimer.

 

[david_bagshaw]

Before the advent of sensibly priced digital data the price of charts, either paper or data was extortionate. However I find it hard to argue for free provision if out of deep water areas are to be kept up to date. After all people like visit my harbour sell full uk BA chart set for sub £50 with a second year update at £6. These can be run on open cpn, which is free. Does the OP hope for the Govt to provide motorists a free road atlas. I doubt it. Also when free it will be wasted, just look at the NHS and the average pensioners pill stock when they die.

Much more of concern is the imposition of high duties and taxes on domestic heating fuel, and fuel used for any form of transport.

Paper provision can only get more expensive as the user base shrinks. As all commercial users mover over to the electronic systems paper will only be produced for yachts men and a few others, with a consiquent increase in costs.

 

[maxi77]

It is exactly that reason that lies behind the free availability of NOAA charts. NOAA remains a tax payer funded setup and has never had to even break even on its activities. On the other hand the UKHO is a trading agency and has to at least break even if not generate a profit. And don't forget that each edition of a chart is regarded as a new work for the purposes of copyright law, as it has been subject to updating since the previous edition.

US law whilst based on UK common law is open to interpretation just as ours is. They went one way and we adopted the version most others countries did. Free charts would mean either more government funding for Droggie or less service. Which do you prefer? I suspect most non boaters would opt for less service which will probably mean though you pay less you lose even more

 

[duncan99210]

US law whilst based on UK common law is open to interpretation just as ours is. They went one way and we adopted the version most others countries did. Free charts would mean either more government funding for Droggie or less service. Which do you prefer? I suspect most non boaters would opt for less service which will probably mean though you pay less you lose even more

And your point is? The U.S. solution is the way they've decided to go: that is to maintain a tax payer subsidy to provide a less than perfect solution for free. The UK solution is to go down the commercial route, maintain copyright and charge folks for access to either data or printed charts. I take no side in this, only point out what the situation is. The OP is on a hiding to nothing trying to change the status quo as regards UKHO as they are simply running a commercial enterprise not a government department, despite the name. Equally, the Ordnance Survey is also a commercial operation which had its roots in the military need for accurate mapping. They too generate their income by charging for access to their data in either electronic or printed form. Both setups produce high quality data and you should expect to pay for it. How you choose to get hold of it is down to you.

 

[alanch]

Interesting 83.2% of all the merchant ships in the world do NOT use ADMIRALTY CHARTS charts preferring American NOAA US Navy charts. Apparently often a commercial decision.

Rubbish! In over 45 years at sea on ships of every nationality I have only ever seen NOAA US Navy Charts on a US warship, and they were using BA charts in the Thames. 95% of ships I see use BA charts, except the Russians who use their own.

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

I bought my last Admiralty chart over five years ago. I have a lot of the UK. Never again. Feel free to make me an offer.

From now only digital for me.

 

[jerrytug]

I bought my last Admiralty chart over five years ago. I have a lot of the UK. Never again. Feel free to make me an offer.

From now only digital for me.

Have you got Helgoland to Brunsbuttel?

 

[maxi77]

And your point is? The U.S. solution is the way they've decided to go: that is to maintain a tax payer subsidy to provide a less than perfect solution for free. The UK solution is to go down the commercial route, maintain copyright and charge folks for access to either data or printed charts. I take no side in this, only point out what the situation is. The OP is on a hiding to nothing trying to change the status quo as regards UKHO as they are simply running a commercial enterprise not a government department, despite the name. Equally, the Ordnance Survey is also a commercial operation which had its roots in the military need for accurate mapping. They too generate their income by charging for access to their data in either electronic or printed form. Both setups produce high quality data and you should expect to pay for it. How you choose to get hold of it is down to you.

Quite simply different countries come up with different solutions for the same problem. At the end of the day the service has to be paid for, either by the users which is our solution or by the taxpayer which is the US version.

 

[prv]

For what it's worth, the US approach to charts is just one facet of a much wider principle - under US law, nothing produced by the government is subject to copyright. So everything from photos taken by their military, to videos from NASA, to pig-keeping advice booklets from the Department of Agriculture, are in the public domain. It's the same attitude that makes GPS free for use as well - you can bet that if the UK government had set that up first, there'd have been a hefty annual license fee and none of us lot would be using it.

That said, I don't think it's unfair that the UKHO should be set up to cover its costs, and the suggestions in the OP that they might not have the right to are little more than Viago-esque crackpot theories.

Pete

 

[john_morris_uk]

What many people don't realise is that there are security implications for data and the UKHO.

As it stands the UK is the ONLY country in the world with a particular capability in surveying and the data from those surveys is definitely NOT in the public domain.

People might also be interested to know that surveying within a countries territorial waters without diplomatic clearance is considered an 'act of aggression' or 'act of war' and survey ships have to turn off all sensors except their navigational echo sounder when inside the 12 mile limit.

 

[basic]

I amazed to hear that small boat sailors keep all their charts up to date and insert the information from admiralty notices to mariners. Hands up anybody who with more than a few local charts does this! I don't because I have charts for most of the world and it's impracticable. The moment a chart is sold to you either electronically or in hard copy it is out of date. The moment there is a gale off a shallow entrance the chart is out of date but normally the local authority moves the buoyed channel!

When I sailed out of UK waters I mainly used US charts which are indeed copyright free and found they had all the accuracy I required. Basically the hard bits do not move and the use of lighthouses and even buoys are becoming less essential because of GPS and chart plotters. Does anybody sail without a GPS on board? US Charts indeed US charts supplied by tides end for around £3 each are all out of date like my portfolio and contain sufficient information for safe navigation.

Certainly if you are driving a supertanker, aircraft carrier or cruise liner you do indeed need spot on accuracy but why on earth should British small boat owners, subsidise and pay the salaries of a load of 'officials' who simply want to preserve their jobs. The copyright element of Admiralty charts is quite simply used for that purpose.

A+ Couldn't agree more.

 

[NormanS]

What many people don't realise is that there are security implications for data and the UKHO.

As it stands the UK is the ONLY country in the world with a particular capability in surveying and the data from those surveys is definitely NOT in the public domain.

People might also be interested to know that surveying within a countries territorial waters without diplomatic clearance is considered an 'act of aggression' or 'act of war' and survey ships have to turn off all sensors except their navigational echo sounder when inside the 12 mile limit.

To which particular capability do you refer?

Note that there appears to be nothing to prevent anyone from carrying out their own surveys, and making their findings available to the public. In the absence of BA charts, at a useful scale for many inshore areas, that is precisely what is happening today.

 

[[70521]]

I think that the Admiralty Charts are amazing value for money.