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

Re:If Nothing Else, Princpled.

[sumdumass]

What straw man. There is no straw man there. How many times do I have to tell you that. If you would look the definition up from a source not funded by only who you agree with, you would know that.

Bada Bing! Bada Bum!
You keep right on talking out of your ass there. When you ARE sure where the data can be found, then you get back to me. Otherwise, STFU already.

I did not say the data would be somewhere were you could easily find it. I said you have to look for it. I explained some of the processes needed to find the data and some of the reasons why it isn't just givin away. This is why I think you are intelectually lazy as well as an imbecile. Just because you are too lazy or stupid to find it, doesn't mean it isn't there. If you look harder, you will find it in the last places you looked. But no one said it would be easy, This is why organization like the Cato institute get funding from source that you think mifght bring the study into question. If it were easy, you couls pump studies out and we wouldn't need them, would we?