Who "Owns" Ag Data is not the "Problem"
January 17th, 2023: My 26th Edition of Easy Observations in Agriculture
Visit my website www.easyobservations.com for more info about me or follow me on LinkedIn and Twitter
Opening Thoughts:
You know I was almost going to write about something else around either the Mineral news from Google on them “graduating” from Google X and getting into Ag or John Deere thinking Satellites are the future. I’ll get there this or next month I’m sure when I start to refurbish the look and feel of this newsletter (I’m going to just make more short and sweet content with the same amount of Memes probably.)
Now with that said, what made me think of talking about Ag Data Ownership really stemmed from a random writeup I saw on Linkedln around it. It also made me think that every other article or write up I’ve seen on the topic all sound the same more or less which bothered me. After thinking through it some more, a sort of big thought came to mind and it made me think I might just have to dig deeper on it.
Before I dive into all of that I also want to talk through some of the standard problems people gripe about all the time while putting my farmer, ag business, agtech, and precision ag hats on. You see the thing is all groups dealing with Ag Data have a right to have or own some data. Not all, but some. Even farmers don’t own it all as some might think. Anyway, let’s see if I can turn some heads.
Who owns What and Why:
While there is going to be some debate on certain aspects on the above as is tradition, I’m going to loosely try to define it in layman’s terms. Before I do that, I want to propose a basic thought around Agricultural Digital Data...
NOT ALL AG DATA IS CREATED EQUALLY AND DOES NOT HAVE EQUAL VALUE
While that sounds logical by using common sense, I don’t think many understand this. Think of it this way, does a Penny have value of $.01? Yes, but just because it has value it doesn’t mean it’s valuable to anyone really. Think of the take-a-penny plate at every convenience store out there. Heck, even dimes, nickels, quarters, and dollar bills are an afterthought these days. I think we need to think about this in terms of the real value of certain Ag Data types and how it can be used to in reality.
There is also another piece that will come at the end and it’s one that I’ve never really heard anyone talk about with Ag Data. To give a little nugget, it’s about the risk and liability of what the data can showcase on behalf of others. It’ll be fun I promise.
Here are my main points below. It is not perfect and I’m sure I’m missing something, but I think you’ll get the picture.
Data not owned by anyone in Ag:
More or less what you see below is not owned by anyone in Ag and only owned by either the government or the commercial provider that licenses it out to their discretion. I’ve been asked countless times by farmers and land owners that imagery over their land should be theirs. I usually say, talk to the government or Google about that first and they usually shut up. It’s still a weird thing. Regardless how you think about it, it is the government who owns the airspace above you even if it’s a few feet off the ground. Even the commercial groups need approval by the government. That’s just what it is.
Satellite Imagery -
Open Government Licensed Imagery like Sentinel, Landsat, and MODIS.
Commercial Satellite Imagery like what you see on Google Maps more or less. They own it and license/sell accordingly.
Certain Aerial Imagery
USDA NAIP Imagery: Free to download and use at your discretion
Commercial aerial imagery: You also see this in Google maps and beyond. They own it and license/sell accordingly.
Certain Weather Stations
Governmental, State, and County typically: I’m not an expert here, but from what I see you can tap into basically most types of governmental weather stations say from Airports, Cities, and where common infrastructure exists.
Weather Satellites - If it comes from NOAA or the ESA, you can get it and it’s open. There are some commercial satellites for weather too, but that works much the same as commercial imagery.
Data that maybe is owned multiple parties in Ag:
Custom applied fertilizer, seed, chem data: This is a touchy one for sure. I see it in a few ways, but it comes down to two things.
Who owns the machine and the data that is needed to operate it properly while providing the info needed for liability reasons.
The issue here and where it gets murky I think is around the data needed for liability reason which is the rates, type of product, and where it was applied. I do think Service Providers need this data to protect them honestly, but I also get why it’s looked as not theirs.
Who paid for the service and the data needed to provide that service while also providing correct info for liability needs.
So this is the farmer and while they naturally should have the as applied data, I do think they need some of the machine data too for liability reasons as well. With all the regulations now and to come, they will need this.
Drone Imagery - This one has be strife with controversy as it should. There have been big court cases about it recently and it’s still sort of a grey area. This data can be similar to aerial or satellite imagery in that the provider may just license the data to the buyer. I think where farmers get concerned is some rando taking a pic over their farmland. The thing is there really isn’t anything illegal about that as long as two things do not happen from what I’ve seen below. Still not perfect.
The image and drone does not personally identify someone or cause harm to a person on that property. It’s more complex, but something like that.
The image and drone does not create a nuisance towards the owner and or operator of the land which may include a reduction in property value, noise, pollution, or similar problems. Also, more complex than that.
Private Weather Stations - For the most part, unless a farmer leases the station maybe, the farmer would own this data. Where I think there is a grey area is around maintenance data that may be needed by the originator of the sensors to make sure they are properly calibrated and operating. I don’t think this a really issue either at the moment.
Certain Equipment Data - There are billion dollar companies with million dollar lawyers that can figure this one out. Overall, it comes down to the machinery companies getting data from the machines they sold in real time to help them with maintenance, warranty, R&D, and beyond. I get why that is needed and for sure I think it is fine if the machine is leased. You can get into the whole right to repair stuff here as well. This one is a tough one, but I get both sides too.
Data not owned by the farmer:
I’m not going to name all the specific things that this could be, but more or less if it’s any data needed for someone else in Ag for their normal business use that was not given to them by the farmer it is theirs or they license it for their needs. This could be field location, what was planted where, grain quality, amount of inputs sold, and stuff like that. If they basically could create the data themselves or legally get it from some other source than it’s all good.
Data owned by the farmer:
So yeah, the opposite of the above one I guess. The problem with what the farmer owns or not is that it’s not a simple as the data that the farmer created themselves manually or via something they bought as if you’ve seen a smart phone these days there are some limits to what data is and isn’t yours.
I think what is blatantly a farmers is agronomic data that they paid for to be created or was created by themselves that is unique to their personal lives or operation. Still some grey areas there as I mentioned above, but I think it’s the agronomic stuff that concerns growers the most. Mainly yield really and I spose most applied/tested information like fertilizer amounts. If you get into animal ag then there is much more there too. Not crossing that path now.
Overall, what farmers want to say they own is any data that could be used against them more or less. That is their fear be it for local competition, regulation or legal issues, activism or sabotage, or being used by business/corporates for overpricing and manipulation. It really is not more complex than that, but those are also broad reasons and while certain data that is theirs can provide the fear they don’t want, there is also a lot of other data that they can’t control that can do the same. It’s tricky.
Turning it all on its head:
At this point you are probably saying, “I’m mainly just here for the memes, but yeah there are some good points but nothing out of the ordinary.” Well yes, that is likely true for many. Also, there are some reading this that didn’t know this was a thing too. All in all, I’m going to try to make all of that make little sense potentially. I just needed to setup the base. While I’m not a lawyer and maybe someone that is can dive into this more I think I might have something intriguing enough to look in to.
What I’m about to propose maybe has zero merit legally probably. Maybe it doesn’t make sense to some too, but here it is…
THERE MAY BE A LEGAL PRECEDENCE THAT IF SOME ACTION BY ANOTHER DOES PROVIDE A LOSS IN USE OR VALUE OF A PROPERTY THAT THAT GROUP IS LIABLE FOR DAMAGES IN THE LOSS AND USE OF THAT PROPERTY OVER A PARTICULAR AIRSPACE.
Here is the legal precedence that I’m referring to, the UNITED STATES v. CAUSBY, 328 U.S. 256 (1946). This is also used commonly in drone legal cases and is why I remembered it. The whole case is sort of interesting in that basically the government used an airport where they flew over a chicken farm over and over which then reduced the property value and also killed many chickens. It’s more heavy than that, but the farmer won. That is where I got to thinking because it involved a farmer and their lively hood on the property they own and/or operate.
Why I think this can be used for legal data ownership isn’t to showcase who should or shouldn’t own the data. It’s more around what is being done with any type of data that may be harming the value and livelihood of their farming operation.
What I’m proposing is that basically any data tied to a farm is geospatial and coincides with the airspace and value of ones property and operation. Regardless if the grower owns the data or not, if someone is using data to infer that a farmer is doing something wrong that would imply a loss to their value and if it does then the individual or group that created that data that did that is liable for losses. Especially, if the data isn’t sound enough or there actually is enough to prove that the value shouldn’t be reduced.
I know this sounds vague and odd. I’m not saying it makes legal sense enough either. What I’m proposing is for someone who knows more legally and beyond look into it and provide more context.
Here is a random example of how I think this could transpire in the real world:
An AgTech entity creates a model based on data from multiple sources from farmers to other open and private sources. They use this data to build a product that doesn’t identify who’s data is what, but they share a value based on their results as their own to sell that is geospatial marked to others for say a sustainability score that others can buy and use internally and beyond. One group who buys/licenses it focuses on high or poor sustainability rated fields, maybe a land broker or digital broker system. Some of those fields are also either being sold or to be rented again to a new tenant or owner. It also could be to discern the value of the commodity on that property. Certain buyers and renters look at this sustainability score via this platform that was created and because the score is perceived low, the value now is lower to buyers or new renters. Based on this, the landlord shares other data they have to prove that it is sustainable or worth more and that the other third party that created the original sustainable dataset devalued their land. If the original sustainable dataset was limited in understanding of its perceived model of sustainability and somehow this was proven, is the creator of the dataset and others that showcase it liable for the reduction in value of the landlords land especially if the sale or transfer of land rental already took place?
Maybe this is a rare case or seems odd, but I can see this happening more and more. You could put it in the context even that internally a seed company that is putting together all this data from a platform they give to farmers for free is creating marketing data that shows they can charge more for a product to x vs z because of what they know about their yield and even what they sold a grain product for without the knowledge of the farmer. Hence manipulating the market. You kind of see this today anyway with the way inflation and food prices have panned out. It’s not just natural inflation.
Overall, there is a giant liability and risk factor in putting data together to model a result if you use the context in that it creates a negative valuation for the end user. Especially, if that end user also provided some of their data which wasn’t intended to be used against them, but only for agronomic prosperity.
To close:
I might just be that crazy controversial guy that starts to cause a bunch of problems in the ag industry or that just looks generally crazy. Of course if you haven’t figured out that I’m probably both by now to some extent then you should unsubscribe. I’m throwing a rock out into a pond and seeing if it skips or makes a big splash.
I want to see this issue of data ownership talked about more, but what I’m really trying to do is talk about what is actually being done with the data regardless of who owns it or not. Has anybody thought of it that way instead of being so concerned about ownership?
For the most part I think many are doing a fine and great job of protecting farmers and people who own sensitive data. It’s not worth it for many to mess around with it. I do think some are stretching that so as to create something to make more money. I also think big business groups are doing more with it than most know. I actually know this has happened.
In any realm, I’m here to bring this more attention and get people thinking. Does all this data just create more liability problems or is that not a thing? Is it both and varies? Probably. There is no black and white answer here and I know that. What I ask you others putting a bunch of data together though is to look at what you are actually doing with it.
If you are helping the greater good for the producers and the ones that support them, then you should be fine. If it is apparent that you are not, then maybe get ready or change your tune. Regardless, Ag needs to be better at this all.
Thanks for reading Easy Observations! Please Share, Subscribe, and Comment if you would be so kind. I’d also be happy to get together and meet if you’d like to talk more in-depth about AgTech or Earth Observation in Ag. Feel free to contact me at my website. All the best!
Love reading your stuff! I was at the "World A" meetup in San Fran. And yes, there were no farmers in the room. Yet, I think that was on purpose. There were some really bright spots though... and I for one actually think we have just began a move to real Ag technology. The stuff that bubbled up previously illustrated what didn't need to be done! It will change considerably, again, in the future.
Great summary of the situation. I'm a farmer and we collect our own data in inputs and traceability using ODK Collect which our guys can program and create reports themselves. I get emails and calls from people selling ag tech or data collection and the first thing they as for is $5000. The answer is for farms to do their own tech (sorry), that way there's skin in the game. I can't believe all the money going into ag tech and climate tech that would be better spent on actual ag! But VCs don't like that.