London: 5 July 2010

The Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) that is part of the UK National Archives has published a report (24 pages) on the investigation of a complaint between Van Haren Publishing and the Office of Government Commerce.

The states on page 3:

“Background Information

1. The Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI), part of The National Archives, received a complaint in August 2009 from Van Haren Publishing (the Complainant) against the Office of Government Commerce (the Public Sector Body (PSB)). This complaint was submitted under the Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations (SI 2005 No. 1515) (the Regulations).

2. The formal complaint was preceded by a number of exchanges over a significant period of time relating to the terms and conditions that applied to the Complainant’s re-use of the PSB’s material by comparison with those which applied to its official accreditor and official publisher. The parties also entered into an OPSI-facilitated mediation with a view to resolving their dispute. However, this was an entirely separate exercise from the statutory formal complaint investigation that this report covers.

3. OPSI has investigated the complaint and has made recommendations as appropriate.”

--

The report states on page 9:

“Overall Assessment

30. Having carefully considered the documentation supplied to us, and, having met both parties, OPSI, part of The National Archives, partially upholds the complaint. The PSB should further align the basis on which third parties and its official publishing contractor can re-use PRINCE2 core publications.”

--

The report states on pages 16 & 17:

“Recommendations

68. OPSI, part of The National Archives, recommends that, given the provisions of Regulation 13(2) and our finding that PRINCE2 derivative materials are outside the public task, a review of the basis on which the PSB’s official publishing contract is let be initiated in advance of its renewal. This will be to ensure that the terms on which the official publisher re-uses PRINCE2 core material more fully equate to those which apply to third party applicants. The review should consider whether contractual separation between core and derived material will be necessary.

69. To ensure equity in bringing derivative PRINCE2 publications to market, the PSB should establish a fixed embargo period so that the official publisher and third parties have an equal time period within which to prepare derivatives for publication.

70. An embargo period for the publication of derivatives will address the issue of timeliness of access to the raw material to be re-used. Electronic provision of the raw material would also be of potential benefit to applicants.

71. We recommend that the PSB publishes an explanatory note on the circumstances in which its official publisher would produce material outside of its official publishing contract and the application process and conditions that it would be subject to. This would eliminate any perceived ambiguities in the existing arrangements.

72. In the PSB‟S Product Review process, testing whether a product “extends the range of products available by providing a product or service with a different purpose to the portfolio of Official Material” could be construed as constraining the activity of prospective re-users. We recommend that the PSB makes it clear that the intention of such clauses is to ensure that third party publications are clearly differentiated from the PSB’s publications. It should be confirmed by the PSB that it does not intend to veto derivatives that occupy broadly the same market space as its own publications, but that it is simply seeking to ensure that third party publications do not replicate its official publications.

73. The PSB has stated that the internal contract monitoring conditions to which its official publisher is subject are equally as rigorous as those which applicants need to go through. We recommend that the PSB publishes figures on the timescales for internal product review and approval of official derivatives as compared with third party product review and approval.

74. The above recommendations should be acted upon within six months of publication of this report.”

--

Related UK Government announcements to this complaint:

Whitehall shake-up in drive for efficiency

“CAB 091-10 15 June 2010

Responsibility for The Office of Government Commerce (OGC) and the public sector procurement agency, Buying Solutions, will move to the Cabinet Office where they will form part of the Efficiency and Reform Group (ERG), the Prime Minister announced today.”