John-
Sound principles.
Reminds me very much of the AALL Government Relations
Policy. It's available through AALLNET and in pages 713-715 of the
'94-'95 AALL Directory & Handbook. I'd be happy to send you a copy if
you want.
-Mark
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mark E. Estes, Librarian mestes@csn.org
Holme Roberts & Owen LLC voice 303 866-0260
1700 Lincoln #4100 fax 303 866-0200
Denver, CO 80203
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Fri, 10 Feb 1995, John Lederer wrote:
> All of the furor that has gone on this week in Congress has been chaotic,
> confused,
> and often nonsensical. I have seen amendments and proposed amendments that
> would prohibit Thomas, overturn copyright law, etc.
>
> I think the core problem is very simple. No one has enunciated the principles
> that ought to apply before going slapdash into drafting legislation.
>
> These would be mine, at least in tentative form:
>
>
> 1). Government has the obligation to make available widely and inexpensively
> official documents, data, acts, decisions, etc.
>
> This is part of the core function of government. No democracy can function
> without the free flow of information from government to its citizens and vice
> versa. No gevernemnt can function without proclaiming the legal duties it
> requires of its citizens.
>
> It should disseminate such information as efficiently and inexpensively as it
> can-- whether in print, by the Internet , or other means. Using private
> contractors may make sense to obtain efficiency, but if private contractors to
> the government are used, they are agents and accrue to no rights in the
> information-- they would be analgous to a printer.
>
> A reasonable, at cost, charge by government is permissible. Where costs are high
> by circumstance, government ought to subsidize the disseminationm, because this
> is a core governmental function.
>
>
>
> 2) Government ought not compete with private parties in providing
> sophisticated processing tools for the use of information. A table of
> contents or an index, fine. A Premise or a Folio, or headnotes, or annotations
> no. Those tools or services are available on the open market, they are not
> part of government's core functions, and if the government provides the base
> text or information cheaply and widely, they will propsper in a broad
> competitive market.
>
>
> 3) Government ought never require the use or purchase of a particular private
> product.
>
>
> 4) A private company should not be a party, with possible author's rights, to
> the creation of the official government text -- government's constitutional
> functions incldue creating the laws, case decisions, etc.
>
> These principles do not necessarily apply to non-core government information
> (e.g. rocket fuel formulae from NASA).
>
> If I were to apply these principles, I suspect I would strongly disagree with
> West and Lexis in regard to the amendments to the Paper Work reduction Act
> that they are attempting to get adopted today. I would also disagree with West
> in regard to their editorial content, page numbers, etc. being part of the
> "official" text. I suspect that I also might disgaree with TAP in regard to
> the government providing a sophisticated databse of case law, though I am not
> sure that such is their desire.
>
> I would be very interested in comments on these principles. Do they make sense
> to others?. How might they be better expressed? Are there others?
>
>
> Regards,
> John Lederer
> Chair, Tech. Resource Committee, Wis. State Bar
> (speaking only for myself)
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST