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.

6 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 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

    3. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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