Slashdot Mirror


Liberating the Laws You Must Pay To Read

Writing for Boing Boing, Carl Malamud describes the campaign he's been waging to let U.S. citizens read the public safety standards that have become part of federal law — without needing to pay for the privilege. "These public safety standards govern and protect a wide range of activity, from how bicycle helmets are constructed to how to test for lead in water to the safety characteristics of hearing aids and protective footwear." Despite a U.S. Appeals Court ruling which said 'the law' should be in the public domain, many safety codes are still privately produced and then distributed for a fee, to recoup development costs. "Public.Resource.Org has a mission of making the law available to all citizens, and these technical standards are a big black hole in the legal universe. We've taken a gamble and spent $7,414.26 to buy 73 of these technical public safety standards that are incorporated into the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations." Malamud and his Public.Resource.Org foundation are trying — very cautiously — to make these laws more broadly available. "...even though we strongly believe that the documents are not entitled to copyright protection, and moreover that our limited print run is in any case definitely fair use, if a judge were to decide that what we did was breaking the law, 25 copies of 73 standards works out to $273,750,000 in potential liability. While whales may make bigger bets, we draw the line at $273 million."

4 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Re:New Age Math? by FSWKU · · Score: 4, Interesting

    spent $7,414.26 to buy 73 [...] 25 copies of 73 standards works out to $273,750,000

    Am I the only one who doesn't get the math? Or does the judge exponentially impose penalties under copyright protection?

    That's exactly what the copyright cartels try to do . 73 standards works x 25 copies each = 1,825 instances of infringement, working out to $150,000 per instance. Considering the MAFIAA likes to say they can claim up to $250,000 per infringement, that's (sadly) on the middle range of what they claim they can demand.

    --
    "So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
  2. Re:Wikileaks by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Agreed. They should have kept the purchase quiet and leaked it. Worst case scenario, imagine the hilarity of the US government scrambling to keep it's own laws secret.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  3. Re:Ignorance of the Law is supposed to be no excus by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not only that - if the law isn't so fucking convoluted and obtuse and hidden away...

    That's what you get when you allow private industry and corporatist groups like ALEC to write the laws.

    The reason we have laws that are "fucking convoluted and obtuse and hidden away" is because there's somebody who is profiting from those laws being that way. There is no other reason.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  4. Re:Ignorance of the Law is supposed to be no excus by Moryath · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Over 50% of the US House of Representatives are lawyers. Likewise for the Senate.

    You* are full of shit.

    *Your profession and collective members, as such.