Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

City Laws Only Available Via $200 License

Posted by kdawson on from the calling-doctor-malamud dept.

MrLint writes "The City of Schenectady has decided that their laws are copyrighted, and that you cannot know them without paying for an 'exclusive license' for $200. This is not a first — Oregon has claimed publishing of laws online is a copyright violation." This case is nuanced. The city has contracted with a private company to convert and encode its laws so they can be made available on the Web for free. While the company works on this project, it considers the electronic versions of the laws its property and offers a CD version, bundled with its software, for $200. The man who requested a copy of the laws plans to appeal.

34 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. New form of taxes! by ircmaxell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder how the 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' standpoint would be upheld given that you may not be economically able to know the laws...

    --
    If a man isn't willing to take some risk for his opinions, either his opinions are no good or he's no good
    1. Re:New form of taxes! by buttersnout · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance. The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address. I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later. I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records. I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period. The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part. It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.

    2. Re:New form of taxes! by Kartoffel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The company that's typing up these laws got sucked into a bad deal. They probably signed a contract believing they would hold a copyright over the laws. Bullshit. At most, that company has a copyright over the CD version that they're creating.

      The laws themselves are public domain, as laws must be. To claim anything else renders the City of Schenectady illegitimate. Seriously--you can't make asinine claims like that and expect to remain a legitimate form of government. If I were working for the State or a neighboring local government, I'd give Schenectady a few weeks to come to their senses and then pull the plug. No more funding, no more cooperation, no nothing. Treat them like a rogue state. It's harsh but necessary. No one should have to stand for government gone haywire.

    3. Re:New form of taxes! by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 3, Funny

      This is unfair, but necessary for the proper function of the wheels of justice. It's also unfair when an innocent person is convicted and sentenced to jail, but that is also necessary for the proper functioning of the wheels of justice. Justice demands that it's wheels are regularly lubricated with innocent blood. If you don't want bad-guys running rampant, then you have to throw some virgins into the mangler. It's the price of justice.

      --
      ...
    4. Re:New form of taxes! by Minozake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd rather have no justice.

      --
      http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun :)
    5. Re:New form of taxes! by Unequivocal · · Score: 3, Informative

      True, but they can copyright the format and indexes to the content. WestLaw has been doing this for years with the Federal Case law and making a killing. Recently open indexes of Federal Case law have been taken more seriously and many judges accept both WestLaw index citation and the open format. But for a while WestLaw effectively owned the Federal Case statutes b/c they copyrighted their index of them, and you could only file in Federal court by using that index scheme.

      So there are ways to use copyright to lock down what should be public record, and this company may be using such a strategy to charge $200 for their version of the content.

    6. Re:New form of taxes! by Rary · · Score: 5, Informative

      That doesn't make charging to know the law legitimate.

      The point is that they're not charging to know the law. According to TFA, you can read the law "at the Schenectady Public Library, Schenectady County Supreme Court Library, the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations". And as of next year you'll be able to read and search the law online for free. In the meantime, if you want a copy to take home, you have to pay for it.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    7. Re:New form of taxes! by Conzar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The wheels of justice have fallen off. There is no justice especially when the laws are corrupt. It is impossible for everyone to know all of the laws; therefore, the system is broken. Why is it in the USA we have the most people in Prison in the entire world? Instead of passing more laws, our politicians should actively seek real solutions that end poverty, crime, and war; however, this does not make good business. So they ignore these social problems and continue down the path of fascism.

    8. Re:New form of taxes! by russotto · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records. I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period.

      Judge was an idiot. Ignorance of the _law_ is no excuse. Ignorance of specific FACTS often is; ignorance of the law in your case would be if you knew your license was suspended but you didn't know that driving with a suspended license was illegal.

      In this case, the courts will (as usual) rule for the government. On two grounds
      1) You can always head down to the state capital and examine the laws in their law library, on paper.
      2) States have long been incorporating copyrighted codes into their laws by reference, and the courts have been perfectly happy to let them do it. Want to add an electrical outlet? That'll be $$$$ for the NEC, please.

      The more interesting case will be if some enterprising person buys the $200 CD, strips the laws themselves out of it (minus any formatting or commentary by the publishing company), and posts them or starts selling his own CD.

    9. Re:New form of taxes! by DustyShadow · · Score: 3, Informative

      In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance. The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address. I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later. I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records. I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period. The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part. It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.

      That judge is an idiot. You weren't ignorant of the laws. You were ignorant of the facts. Sorry that happened.

    10. Re:New form of taxes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry, bucko, but that's exactly how the American Justice System is NOT supposed to work. Sure, the innocent still get convicted wrongly, but it's not a necessary function of the system. It's a glitch in the system, one that we strive to eliminate. And before you turn this into a false dilemma, we also want to eliminate the converse glitch: guilty people walking on technicalities. It's a balancing act with no clear proportions, though we (should) tend slightly toward preserving the innocent.

    11. Re:New form of taxes! by digitalunity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most countries have more laws than people can remember. It's a natural progression of law codified in specific legal language, combined with capitalism that lets market forces get in the pockets of politicians and get specific alterations or amendments made for their benefit.

      Your example about the number of people we have in prison isn't related to this topic. A large number of them are in prison for non-violent drug offenses-something they knew was illegal. I don't believe our war on drugs is really about drugs, it's about making minorities criminals.

      I do agree though, we have far too many laws. Those laws that should exist often are far too long. If I wanted a paper copy of all the laws that apply to me, meaning township, county, state and federal law, it would fill my entire house to the top. That is insane.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    12. Re:New form of taxes! by Minwee · · Score: 3, Informative

      What part of '[the laws will] be made available on the Web for free" didn't you understand?

      This part:

      At the request of staffers at City Hall, Eiss filled out a form, which he later learned was a formal request for records access under New York's Freedom of Information Law. A week later, he received a response saying his request was denied.

      The reason: "Materials requested are protected by copyright and release of materials is through exclusive license only."

      Where, you know, the laws are _not_ being made available to mere citizens.

      That's why the city has contracted with a national company called General Code for about $20,000 to create a comprehensive, searchable electronic version of the code that eventually will be posted on the Web and available to all.

      City employees have access to the current electronic version through General Code, but "that is strictly proprietary and copyrighted," Van Norden said. "They own the electronic code and we use it under an electronic licensing agreement."

      In case "reading the excerpts from the article" is still too long, let me sum it up for you: When asked for a copy of the City code, L. John Van Norden, acting on behalf of the City of Schenectady, informed Arthur Eiss that he not only couldn't have it, but that he was not even allowed to access the same copy which City employees use. The fact that the company which has created this problem promised to eventually make a publicly available version doesn't help anyone right now.

      Now that there are a few more details, is that part easier to understand?

    13. Re:New form of taxes! by mitgib · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Your example about the number of people we have in prison isn't related to this topic. A large number of them are in prison for non-violent drug offenses-something they knew was illegal. I don't believe our war on drugs is really about drugs, it's about making minorities criminals.

      I think you've touched on something, but not the full grasp of the situation. I think the higher percentage of minorities being in prison is due to their lack of resources to acquire a proper defense. But disregard the makeup of our prison population and look only at the sheer number of prisoners, and it seems to me to be a new form of bringing back slavery, with corporate run prisons being the new plantation owners. These corporations are charging a fee to the states they house prisoners for and that fee will cover the operating costs as well as a profit. Now add in labor costs they can earn from selling the use of the prisoners for or manufacturing they do within the walls of the prison constructing products. More profit.

      So now we have another new, large, powerful, deep pocketed lobbying group pushing for harsher laws and stiffer penalties to grow the population of these new slaves, to the point of one day we will either be a prisoner or a prison guard.

      --
      Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation
    14. Re:New form of taxes! by rantingkitten · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The judge may have been an idiot but that is the usual view of judges who deal with traffic court, where normal conventions do not apply. The state skirts around most protections guaranteed to you, the defendant, by classing the charges as "administrative violations" or something similar, rather than "criminal charges". Since the Constitution only guarantees rights of the accused for criminal prosecutions, presto! You suddenly have no right to a trial by jury, or for an attorney. "Innocent until proven guilty," while not precisely codified by the Constitution, is also a concept that has no meaning in traffic court.

      This has been going on for a long, long, long time. Here's Mr Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain, to describe it for us:

      We sat on wooden benches in a lock-up partitioned off from the Court Room, for four hours, awaiting judgment -not awaiting trial, because they don't try people there, but only just take a percentage of their cash, and let them go without further ceremony. .... I stayed by and watched them dispense justice a while and observed that in all small offences the policeman's charge on the books was received as entirely sufficient, and sentence passed without a question being asked of either accused or witnesses...

      Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- has changed since Clemens' time, well over one hundred years later.

      Here's an example. In 2005 my insurance lapsed for a day because I forgot to pay or something. I don't know, it was years ago. Anyway, in Georgia, apparently the state gets notified when this happens, and suspends your tag. Not your license, mind you -- your tag. I had no idea this happened, they just did it. For the next several years I went about my business, including getting my tag updated annually, and even being pulled over a few times, with nary a word about this from any of the tag office clerks, police, or anyone else.

      Finally, one cop noticed, pulled me over, and arrested me for driving on the suspended tag. I went to jail because of this.

      The judge decided it was my fault and blah blah blah ignorance is no excuse yadda yadda. The truth is, I had been dutifully updating my tag every year as required, which should say something about my intent to fully comply with the law, and I'd think that any rational person would see that no offense was meant and no harm was done, so send me on my way. But no.

      That's how the justice system works. The laws are so numerous, so convoluted, and updated and modified so frequently, that we as a society freely acknowledge that the average person has no way of understanding it, which is why we have specialty occupations like lawyers. But we expect the average person to comply with all these laws he can't understand, too.

      It really doesn't matter that the laws are theoretically available for anyone to read. No mortal human has time for that. Even lawyers tend to specialise in one specific area of law, and when asked about some other area, will give you mostly blank looks.

      To an extent, I think ignorance of the law is a fine excuse. Clearly there are certain things that are known to be illegal across the vast majority of the populace, but there are way too many people being prosecuted and going through immense legal hassle over minor violations of obscure laws nobody knows or cares about except the state when they need some excuse to extort more money from the citizenry.

      --
      mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
    15. Re:New form of taxes! by s73v3r · · Score: 3, Informative

      He says he paid the ticket (the part where he mentioned that he mailed it in, presumably with payment. He could have mailed in a ticket envelope with rat feces in it, but I think they would have remembered the address from that). I don't know about any of you, but any ticket that I've ever mailed in, I've never gotten anything back on. So once he sent payment for the ticket, there really is no reason to believe that something was wrong.

    16. Re:New form of taxes! by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ayn Rand - ""There's no way to rule innocent men.
      The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
      Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.
      One declares so many things to be a crime
      that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." "

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  2. WE THE PEOPLE..... by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ..no longer own our government. Time for that city's citizens to fire all the politicians (hopefully peacefully not by force), and rebuild the government from scratch

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  3. What exactly is nuanced? by liquiddark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ignorance of law is not a defense in a court of law, yet people are subject to laws they cannot read in detail. Doesn't seem very nuanced. It seems a very straightforward violation of basic principles of civics.

  4. But by igny · · Score: 3, Funny

    Think of the lawyers!

    --
    In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
    1. Re:But by rliden · · Score: 4, Funny

      Think of the lawyer's children!

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame, more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage.
    2. Re:But by Hasai · · Score: 4, Funny

      I do; that's why I always load hollow-points.
      ];)

      --

      Regards;

      Hasai

  5. A simple solution by dyfet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any law which does not offer universal access to those claimed to be subject to it should not have universal jurisdiction over said population. A very simple quid pro quo. If you have to pay to know the law, it only can be applied to those who paid :).

  6. Outrageous by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As I was reading TFA there was another thing I saw that outraiged me besides the ludicrous copyrighting of laws.

    Eiss dropped by City Hall a couple of weeks ago and asked for a copy of the city code, a two-part document that includes the City Charter and the administrative code, a full set of local ordinances governing everything from building inspections to waste disposal.

    Because it's voluminous -- the paper version fills two thick, black, 3-ring binders, says Corporation Counsel L. John Van Norden -- Eiss asked for it in electronic format, probably a disk.

    Why does a city's laws and codes have to be two fat binders? Perhaps I'm making a wrong assumption (or just have my head up my ass; I'm on my first cup of coffee this morning), but a thick binder where I work is about four inches thick.

    Why so many codes and regulations? And not only does one have to obey these laws, but there are the state and Federal laws you have to abide by as well.

    How the hell is anyone supposed to avoid being a criminal when there are books and books of laws one has to obey?

    I'd like to see a new federal law that says all laws, codes, and ordinances expire after a period of ten years, after which time lawmakers can re-enact those laws if they deem necessary. We have WAY too many laws.

    And I'd like to see the next copyright revision state plainly and emphatically that no government can copyright anything whatever.

    Someone please violate this city's bogus copyright and get the laws on the internet. And publically shame the city and its leaders for their insanity. I know if I lived in Schenectady I'd be voting against the incumbants (of course, I usually do here anyway).

    --
    Free Martian Whores!
    1. Re:Outrageous by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't doubt that there are a fair few superfluous laws on the books(in that city, and generally), and that unnecessary complexity is a major vice; but I suspect that most of the actual thickness is contributed by things like building codes.

      Even in a hypothetical libertarian utopia where the state handles nothing but defense and the bare outlines of criminal law, you are going to end up with some very lengthy laws, either directly or by reference. For instance, "due process" is pithy; but what it actually means, once you get to the level of court procedure, access to lawyers, details of how one can/cannot be detained and under what circumstances, etc, etc. would be hard to encapsulate in under book length. You could keep the law code itself short by simply refusing to go into detail and handwaving, or by referring to outside codes of practice; but that doesn't really help. If you do the first, you don't really have a rule of law at all. If you do the second, you simply have a very long code of laws that is split up among numerous documents, with your actual "law code" serving as little more than an index.

      Once you get into the realm of things like building codes, which are necessarily pretty technical, this problem just becomes greater.

      This is not to say that complexity is good(it isn't, one should always strive for Einstein's "simple as possible; but no simpler"); but it does mean that you have to be careful to distinguish between unnecessary and invidious complexity, and necessary complexity. It's like the use of technical jargon. People complain, often rightly, that it is used to confuse and intimidate laymen and keep them from questioning experts; but there are plenty of things that are simply complex and cannot be usefully simplified without distortion.

    2. Re:Outrageous by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What I say is that laws should be strictly hierarchical.

      You should be able to look up what you want to do, and be able to read maybe 50 laws about that topic, and know factually that no other law can be relevant.

      For example, look up 'Public property', then 'Not in a vehicle', then 'Not deliberately interacting with others', and find out what the laws on loitering or whatever are, and know that no other laws can actually apply.

      That's not the best example, and those categories are dumb, but the point is, while the law is roughly hierarchical, it's not hierarchical by law, and hence some random law you've never heard of can cover the situation you're in, even if you went and looked that situation up in the actual place you should have.

      I.e., legally speaking, you have to read the entire law to know if you can do anything at all, which is idiotic and, frankly, unconstitutional.

      All laws, at all government levels, should be required to be posted in a way that lets you 'drill down' to the area of any actions you might be considering, and read all laws that vaguely cover it. Maybe allowing 100 'laws' total at the ultimate level. Each category clearly explaining what other categories and laws are under it.

      If you can demonstrate that you looked up your behavior where a reasonable person would, and the law you're being charged with wasn't there, said charge should be thrown out, and the legislature should be informed that law won't be enforced until it gets placed in the correct place.

      The same law, could, of course, end up in multiple places, which means we shouldn't use this system to enumerate the laws. We could keep using the existing system, only have one copy of each law, but require a useful index.

      (If I thought it was vaguely possible, I'd instead suggest having each law 'tagged with keywords', which would be a better way to do this.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  7. Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do people on a jury have to pay $200 as well? As it can be real hard to be on a jury and not know the law.

  8. Summary by MarkvW · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TFA reports that the code is available in multiple public locations. The citizen can make copies of the ordinances from those sources.

    That the city code is a twisted mess is no big surprise. A lot of municipalities have that problem.

    The assertion of copyright is stupid, just stupid. The morons will soon realize that they have to retreat from that lunatic undemocratic position or they will be sued under New York's FOIA.

  9. To forestall the anti-government ranters . . . by MarkvW · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's what the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has said about Schenectady's brain-dead legal position:

    "For these reasons, we reject SBCCI's deconstruction of Banks into merely utilitarian and factual issues. Instead, we read Banks, Wheaton, and related cases consistently to enunciate the principle that "the law," whether it has its source in judicial opinions or statutes, ordinances or regulations, is not subject to federal copyright law."

    Veeck v. Southern Bldg. Code Congress Intern., Inc.
    293 F.3d 791
    C.A.5 (Tex.),2002

  10. Misleading Headline by deiol · · Score: 3, Informative

    The headline states that the laws are only available via a $200 license, but that is not the case. The laws currently exist in two forms, a paper version and an electronic version that is stored in a proprietary format. The paper copy is held in multiple 3-ring binders and would cost $656 to reproduce, and in order to read the proprietary electronic format you would need to license the software required for $200. No one ever said the laws themselves were copyrighted. They are also available to view for free in multiple public locations, "White said copies of the code, with updates early this year, are on file at the Schenectady Public Library, Schenectady County Supreme Court Library, the Schenectady County Community College Library and several other locations."

    So you can see that no one is preventing anyone from viewing the laws, the problem is if you want your own personal copy it just isn't financially feasible at this time. Luckily the city realizes this and they're working to get a copy of the code online, which will be accessible for free. It shouldn't be this difficult to view city laws electronically so searching is simpler, and this is a good example of why we shouldn't use proprietary formats. Although your content is owned by you, you're limited to what you can do with it because of the format it's in.

  11. New business opportunities. by SharpFang · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dear City Council of Schenectady

    I would like to recommend to you an interesting article.

    The subject is a result of my study "Location, timer settings and defusing codes of explosive devices located in various public buildings of the City of Schenectady".

    I'm convinced you would be very interested in the information contained therein. I am willing to sell you a copy of said article, but considering its literary and informational value, I estimate it to be worth $10mln.

    Simultaneously I would like to state I have no connection with manufacturers of these devices nor people who planted them. This is merely an scientific work of an informative study that should be of interest to all citizens of the city.

    Faithfully, yours, ...

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  12. ignorance of the law by David+Chappell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In my experience the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" standpoint holds up whether or not you have a good excuse for your ignorance. The police once copied down my address incorrectly on a ticket (they ignored my correct address on the copy of the ticket I mailed in) causing a summons to court, a notice of default judgement against me, a notice that my ticket was unpaid and a notice that my license had been suspended to be sent to the wrong address. I was later charged with driving with a suspended license after an accident a few months later. I discovered what had happened after some digging at the bureau of public records. I explained what had happened to the judge and he told me the ignorance of the law is ones own fault period. The fact that the state had tried to contact me was sufficient on their part. It is always your responsibility to become informed of the law regardless of any difficulties you have.

    Though it sounds like you were treated unfairly, this is not a true example of the "ignorance of the law" principle in operation. (As a side note, the IRS lost a similar case a few years ago. The court did not buy the argument that they had informed the citizen by sending notices to the wrong address.)

    Despite what know-it-alls say, the "ignorance of the law" principle is not absolute. It is a compromise which favors the state against the citizen. In most cases the citizen is assumed to know about any law which has been properly published. Without it, those who wanted to break the law would deliberately avoid learning about it. With it, citizens can be victimized when they are punished for violating laws about which they might not have known. This is considered a necessary trade-off in order to preserve the state's ability to punish the truly guilty.

    There is controversy about when ignorance of the law becomes an excluse. The state's case is strongest when the citizen is engaged in an activity which is far outside the scope of what normal people do, such as if he is operating a nuclear power plant. It is expected that he will know that special laws will apply and will perform the necessary research.

    Factors which weaken the government's case: the citizen is engaged in an ordinary activity, the law is new, the citizen can show that he made a good faith effort to learn about the law (especially if a government official mis-informed him), access to the text of the law is obstructed.

    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/11/13/1310212/City-Laws-Only-Available-Via-200-License?art_pos=1#

    If I am operating a nuclear power plant, it is reasonable for me to pay $200 for access to the thousands of pages of laws and regulations involved. If I am planting a shrub in my front yard, it is not reasonable to pay $200 for a copy of the city ordinances on CD. At a time when electronic publication is replacing display in public buildings, it is reasonable to ask whether artificial barriers to access, such as high fees, impair the right of cities to enforce their laws.

  13. Re:Welcome to government by Jared555 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I always thought it would be a good idea to do that with comcast. Have a bunch of people call them every single day to check their bandwidth usage. I wonder what the costs of having thousands of people making support calls (preferably all at about the same time of day) to verify the amount of transfer they have left that month compares to getting rid of the limit

  14. The Oregon situation by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Oregon situation isn't this eggregious. Oregon does not charge for access to the state laws, in fact, the state has had them online for years, persuant to the Oregon Sunshine Act of 1973

    --
    Furries make the internet go.