Monitor. This ceased publication in 1998, being replaced by an online version, Climate Monitor Online. Release of raw meteorological data The CRU collates data from many sources around the world. In August 2009 its director, Phil Jones, told the science journal Nature that he was working to make the data publicly available with the agreement of its owners but this was expected to take some months, and objections were anticipated from National Meteorological Organisations that made money from selling the data. It was not free to share that data without the permission of its owners because of confidentiality agreements, including with institutions in Spain, Germany, Bahrain and Norway, that restricted the data to academic use. In some cases, the agreements were made orally, and some of the written agreements had been lost during a move. Despite this, the CRU was the focus of numerous requests under the Freedom of Information Act for data used by the unit's scientists. Nature reported that in the course of five days in July 2009 the CRU had been "inundated" with 58 FOI requests from Stephen McIntyre and people affiliated with his Climate Audit blog requesting access to raw climate data or information about their use. In early 2011 a large amount of raw weather station data had been released by the Met Office and the US Global Historical Climatology Network, but around two-thirds of the data owners did not respond to the CRU requests for agreement, and both Poland and Trinidad and Tobago declined. Two FOIA requests for data shared with another researcher were refused by the university, and the requestors appealed this to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). In its decision released on 23 June 2011, the ICO required CRU to release the remaining raw data irrespective of the wishes of the meteorological organisations which owned the data. This decision included data from Trinidad and Tobago but did not cover Poland. The raw data release was completed by 27 July 2011. CRU email controversy In November 2009, hackers gained access to a server used by the CRU and stole a large quantity of data, anonymously posting online more than 1,000 emails and more than 2,000 other documents. Some climate change sceptics including bloggers falsely asserted that a number of the leaked e-mails contain evidence supporting their global warming conspiracy theory that scientists had allegedly conspired to manipulate data and to keep scientists who