Like everyone, I am sussing how this new system works, so I checked my download log (HBRG, N Scotland) and find that indeed this lady from FirstEcology has downloaded 63 of our Highland records in order to 'understand gcn distribution in somerset' for 'Personal interest'.  Forgive me if I am just a tad sceptical!

Our HBRG records are on full public access, but this does seem in conflict with the rules of the game.  It was suggested to me early on in the consultation that this sort of apparent misuse of the download privilege would lead to more datasets being placed on restricted access.  If that happens, we will all be losers.  Here we are on day 1 of proper function, and that fear seems very real.

NBNG team - please sort this one quickly!

Murdo

Psychic, are you?  It popped in just 10 min ago.

M.

Hi
If a user writes in the 'description of data use' box that they are interested in a particular species and/or a particular area, but then doesn't doesn't select taxonomic or geographic filters in their access request or download, they will get more records than those referred to in the description of use.  E.g. if someone is interested in otters in Yorkshire but doesn't select a geographic filter, they will get all otter records for the whole of the UK and Ireland.  This may be user error or it may be deliberate - they might want to filter the records geographically themselves in GIS, because this gives them more functionality than the Gateway filters (e.g. draw their own polygon).  Or they might want to look at the national distribution of otters to inform their study of otters in Yorkshire.
Yes, consultants downloading records or requesting access to records for a desk study for a client should select "Data Provision and Interpretation Services (Commercial)" as the reason for use.  A few have selected the wrong use type - I have contacted them, and so have some of the data providers.  I have also posted about this on the CIEEM LinkedIn Group and UK Ecology Professionals LinkedIn group.  The issue of consultants using the Gateway for data searches and contravening the T&Cs is not new and we (NBN, ALERC, ALGE, CIEEM) have been working together to try to reduce this through awareness raising and training, and we will continue to do so.
Matt - regardless of which use category is selected, the user has to type a description in the free text box.  If you are not happy with their description, you can reject their request for access or ask them for more information before you grant it.

Just to jump in here, we've had some downloads with the reason being "personal interest" in the comments box as well as the drop down. Perhaps a minimum word limit would be useful? Hate them myself, but not sure how to encourage people to be a bit more descriptive (as these are downloads rather than access requests I can't intercept them and ask for more information?)

Morning Matt,

I have just denied a number of requests from someone asking just that.. Interestingly they actually approached the LRC and paid for a search only a few weeks ago, i assumed it was in relation to that request but the lack of a filter may suggest otherwise.

I would agree however, if the search had been filtered geographically i would have had no problem in granting access. All we can do for now is explain that in the response (i also offered to repeat the search for 'all' records if that was what they really wanted at no additional charge).

I'm interested in how others deal with access requests for purposes that, under the NBN Gateway Ts and Cs, would seem to require written permission from the data provider (financial profit, commercial, academic research - so consultancies and potentially students, for example).  If you are happy with the proposed use, do you accept the data request and info. given in 'request reason' as requesting permission and provide written permission within the 'Grant reason' text box?  Or, do you for example state that you are providing access for use of the data as laid out in the Ts and Cs, and that you should be contacted directly if they intend to use any data (including parts of the datasets that are full public access) for any of the purposes that require explicit written consent?

Thanks,
Linds

I have had a download notification thus:

Andre Gardner        Sat Nov 16 2013 15:36:40 (GMT)    All sensitive and non-sensitive records for Triturus cristatus (Laurenti, 1768)    Personal interest    Want to find populations near my home to go pond dipping.    63 records from this dataset in this download. This is 0.2% of this dataset and this comprises 0.2% of the download

In the old days Andre could have seen the data local to his home (wherever that is) through the old (and much-loved) interactive map.  It is unlikely that he would have selected every GCN dot on the map.  Now he downloads thousands of records from the entire country in order to look at the few that might be relevant.

Is this what was intended?  I don't know.  Desirable?  I doubt it.  Useful to the recipient?  Not if he really just wants records from near his home.  Why is it not possible through our new IMT to download (or copy and paste in one action rather than 25 at a time) all the records included in the bounding box?  I suspect that if that facility was available as in the old IM fewer blanket downloads would be called.  The current geographical filter in the download dialogue is far too clumsy to encourage its use.  Once again, something that could be done in seconds in the old Gateway takes wading through an opaque and clumsy process in the new 'improved' version.

I will continue to ponder whether Andre wants this info to avoid catching GCN or the opposite.

M.