by Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on 9th July 2009. You asked for:-
A downloadable copy of the LiMA Software
Logic Integrated Medical Assessment (LiMA) software only functions as an interactive process during an assessment, it has no independent function and is designed to run on Atos Healthcare networked based PCs not standalone PCs. Furthermore we have decided not to release specific technical data relating to LiMA software for the following reasons.
Reasons for claiming exemption
We consider the information exempt from disclosure under section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the “Act”). This is because, in our opinion, the disclosure of the information under the Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of both DWP and a third party licensee of DWP.
In this regard, we can tell you that DWP holds copyright, the intellectual property rights and has licensed a third party to use, customise, distribute, incorporate, market, maintain, support, sell and sub-license LiMA (and other software) in return for payment of a royalty to DWP. In that licence, DWP confirms that it will not, in effect, allow any other party similar rights.
The LiMA software program is not only integral to the conduct of DWP business, it also represents a significant commercial interest to the DWP. Therefore we decline to provide the software, any technical or other information that would enable full or partial reproduction of the LiMA system.
While we acknowledge that, if supplied to you, the information would continue to be protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (which would prohibit certain commercial re-use of the information by you) we have, after full consideration, reached the conclusion that the likelihood of prejudice to our commercial interests, and those of our licensee, remains. The information has inherent commercial value in terms of the business methods it reflects and the concepts it employs, neither of which is adequately protected by the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act.
To place this information in the public domain would undermine the basis of the arrangement reached by DWP with its licensee, as it would threaten the uniqueness of the information upon which assessments of commercial risk and return have been made and in relation to which commercial positions have been adopted and acted upon by the parties. We also consider that release of the information would be likely to place DWP at a significant disadvantage in seeking to secure similar licensing arrangements with third parties in the future.
In applying the exemption under section 43 (2) of the Act, we have considered whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. We have concluded that it does. We have reached this conclusion because, in our view, the public interest in understanding how the LiMA system works, and in being assured that the LiMA system properly reflects and supports the identification and assessment of benefit entitlements, can be met by a non-technical description of the system, and the role it is intended to play in the decision making process.
We are also mindful of the fact that any public concerns about the integrity of LiMA can be met and fully addressed through due process of the benefit system itself, which contains rights of review and appeal covering both the DWP’s decision on entitlement to benefit, and the process by which that decision is arrived at. Conversely, we do not believe that the public interest would be served by creating an environment, which adversely impacts the public sector’s ability to obtain a secondary benefit from its investment in information systems.
Were the public sector to release, under the Act, commercially valuable information such as that inherent in the LiMA system, the public sector would find it difficult to engage the expertise of commercial licensees (an expertise the public sector does not have) in deriving latent value from its information systems, to the detriment of the general taxpayer who would be deprived of the royalty revenue which might otherwise be realisable. For these reasons, we believe that it is right to maintain the exemption in relation to the specific information you seek.
If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.
Comments anyone?
Im rather tired, and my head is not functioning properly at the moment, but overall, I feel natural justice is being denied due to profit.
The other tired old excuse of not running on a normal pc was also trotted out, despite the request explaining why it was not the case.
Will comment in more detail at a later date, in the mean time if anyone has any comments, or suggestions please post!
