« Directed Scale-Free Networks | Main | Critter Corn as Risk Management »

March 02, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cb65b53ef00d83433335253ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Malamud Opens Congress:

» government communications from purple motes
Government printing jobs have contributed significantly to the development of the printing industry. In North America from 1640 to 1790, printed government documents probably accounted for about 30% of printed documents considered to have enduring sign... [Read More]

Comments

Iang

I thought there was already a clear ruling that all information produced by the US federal government was public domain by default?

jsqrisk

It's not the information itself that C-Span is claiming to own: it's the specific video recorded by C-Span's cameras. And archived in C-Span's archives, even if taken by Congress's cameras.

Besides, in 1996 Congress passed and Clinton signed the Electronic Freedom of Information Act. Yet in 1998:


However, according to the policy analysis group, none of the 136 government Web sites affected by the act were in full compliance with the rules, such as establishing an organized site with a search engine for documents and supplying electronic forms, dubbed FOIAs, that journalists or citizens can use to request hard-to-find or previously sealed government documents.


Patent office slammed for not posting data
A private citizen is preparing to publish a stack of patent and trademark information on the Net because he says the government is dragging its heels.
By Courtney Macavinta,
Staff Writer,
C|Net News.com,
Published: May 5, 1998, 3:20 PM PDT

Just because it's the law doesn't mean that it's followed, unless somebody brings attention to it.

-jsq

Paul DiPerna

John,

This is a great post.

I've been following your blog for some time now, and just wanted to say I enjoy your selection of topics and your writings. I've learned a lot.


- Paul


Dave

Great post.

This seems unreal. People get important information by reading, listening and watching media. How can you have a free society if you need to ask permission to use footage of a public event because the videotape is owned by a company? I mean, how can real debate happen if you can't use footage?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Risk Reading

Blog powered by Typepad