Library of Congress Threatens Washington Watch Wiki

BackRow writes "Washington Watch, a site devoted to tracking the cost of federal legislation, has raised the hackles of the Library of Congress with a new wiki that makes an unfavorable comparison to the LOC's THOMAS legislative search engine. After Jim Harper, Washington Watch's creator and the director of information policy at the Cato Institute, announced the wiki, he received a nastygram from the LOC." Quoting: "After the announcement, he was contacted by Matt Raymond, the Director of Communications at the Library (and the author of the Library of Congress' blog). Raymond said that he possessed 'statutory and regulatory authority governing unauthorized use of the Library's name and logo and those of Library subunits and programs,' and he asked that Harper stop using the names 'Library of Congress' and 'THOMAS' in his marketing materials."

Comments

I don't know which I dislike more...

[nanosquid]

The LOC response was heavy-handed and unjustified. But the "Washington Watch" site is typical over-simplifying libertarian rhetoric: you cannot account for the cost of legislation in that way.

So, I don't know which to dislike more: LOC government arrogance, or libertarian populist oversimplification.

Re:The LOC statute is irrelevant.

[mvdwege]

This is not a situation where some commercial outfit is making money off of using the name of the Library of Congress.

Excuse me?! This is the Cato Institute we're talking about. You know, the think tank for hire, that will act as an 'indepedent source' to criticise any regulation you want as long as you pay enough.

This is bloody well a commercial outfit drumming up publicity to get more customers, and the teenage libertarians on Slashdot are falling for it in droves.

Sheesh.

Mart