Talk:IMO number

message: Is wikipedia free to add IMO numbers to ship articles given that Fairplay Ltd has the following clause in their Terms and Conditions]?
The Unique IMO Registered Owner and Company Identification Number Scheme utilises the maritime Databases of Lloyd’s Register - Fairplay. The IMO Registered Owner and Company Numbers are the result of past and ongoing data collection, data research and database activities of Lloyd’s Register - Fairplay. The intellectual property rights in the Numbers belong to Lloyd’s Register - Fairplay. Other than the IMO or Flag Administrations, it is not permitted to use these Numbers in any commercial database, commercial web-site or commercial data product, nor to distribute the Numbers for commercial gain, without the prior written agreement of Lloyd’s Register - Fairplay.
-Wikianon (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say no after reading that. A more senior editor should know about this.--Nick??? 09:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What commercial purpose is the use of IMO numbers in an encyclopedia? No commercial gain is made so we are free to use them. Mjroots (talk) 12:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I would say yes, Wikipedia can use IMO numbers. LFP's concern is for commercial usage. Wiki is not a commercial enterprise with no intention of profit. // Mark Renier (talk) 10:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that IMO Numbers are not a private company's property. They are issued by Lloyds/Fairplay acting as agents for the International Maritime Organisation, a specialised agency of the United Nations. Neither shipowners or Lloyds have any say in the matter, the numbers are a legal requirement in International Law enacted in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and are entirely public domain, as a vehicle registration plate is. Like a vehicle registration that can be issued by a national government, or an agency appointed by a national government, IMO numbers are issued by Lloyds acting as an agency on behalf of the IMO. The numbers do not 'belong' to Lloyds, although I suspect the actual publication of them is copyrighted by Lloyds. If that publication is not reproduced for commercial use then I don't see the problem. George.Hutchinson (talk) 11:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: Should this article make mention of the various Official Numbers that ships used before IMO numbers were invented? Mjroots (talk) 12:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Forerunners to IMO numbers

message: As the IMO-source writes here, The IMO ship identification number is made of the three letters "IMO" followed by the seven-digit number assigned to all ships by the Lloyd's Register Fairplay when constructed.. Of course, in an article or database the letters might be omitted (within context --> no misunderstandings). Incidentally, a  <space> in between is not mentioned... -DePiep (talk) 10:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice reference. I don't know how to handle this discrepancy. When our AIS system receives a message, the field with the label "IMO Number" has a value that does not contain "IMO ". It certainly is redundant to include those characters when they provide no extra value. Perhaps a note about "the definition" vs. "in practice"? The IMO number is actually a string of character digits and is not a mathematical number; that is, you do not perform mathematical calculations on the "number", you record the "number" in a database as an array of seven characters. // Mark Renier (talk) 11:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly, the AIS-place you mention is in context: if you only enter/see the digits, they will be interpreted as IMO-id because of being in that place. This is valid for the human eye and a any input screen or database. When there is no such context, quite everyone adds "IMO", preventing misunderstandings. Compare, how in spoken radio-communication, or identifying your ship in a free text email. Now, apart from stating that it is part of the official definition, I won't push it any further. The article is context enough to allow dropping the prefix in further mentionings. -DePiep (talk) 11:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

text: I had not noticed the above comment before now, but it is correct...a verbatim copy of http://www.imo.org/ourwork/safety/implementation/pages/imo-identification-number-scheme.aspx, which is completely inappropriate as it certainly falls under United Nations copyright. I'll attempt to reword the sections involved when I have a block of free time, but anyone else is welcome to do so in the interim. — Huntster (t @ c) 11:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: 'IMO' as part of the 'id-number'

message: I have given this article a general overhaul - there was a lot of duplication of material just copied from other sites and documents - and re-ordered it into, I think, a more logical sequence.  Added a bit on the origin of the numbers themselves in Lloyd's Register.  Dead links removed and generally updated.  Some the cites are not ideal, but the direct online access to the relevant IMO documents seems to be only through Google docs (whose websites seem to be blacklisted by WP).Davidships (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: Cannot see how to change the superscript at end of the Equasis cite (currently No.9) from "(subscription required)" to "(registration required)".  Equasis access is free. Davidships (talk) 23:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's part of the  template, so I suggest bringing this up at Template talk:Cite ship register to make sure there's consensus for such a change. — Huntster (t @ c) 08:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks.  Done. Davidships (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equasis 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on IMO number. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140303220739/http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/en/imo_conv_schedule/conv_schedule_list.aspx?List_Category=2.%20SECURITY to http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/en/imo_conv_schedule/conv_schedule_list.aspx?List_Category=2.%20SECURITY
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Sorry folks, I had a spontanous case of feeling bold and took the whole article apart and reordered it. Pls don't get up in arms, the overwhelming part of content is still there, just in different order! I was driven by the intent to put the information into a more logical (well, at least for me...) structure. Especially the distinction between ship id numbers and owner and company id numbers didn't make sense to me, since they actually are assigned by the same registry (IHS Fairplay) and use the same structure. So, I've put all historical development facts into four chapters of history, clarifying the four steps of expanding the system. And have made assignment and structure paragraphs of their own. To my subjective eye, the info is presented in a better digestable way now. I hope you agree or at least can tolerate the change. Gray62 (talk) 14:08, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Reorganization of Content. Sorry!