News-Home

He's giving you access, one document at a time

Published: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 at 4:26 p.m.

California's building codes, plumbing standards and criminal laws can be found online.

Carl Malamud
Carl Malamud
Carl Malamud says state, federal code, laws should be free
External Links:
  • Public.Resource.org
    This Web site contains the Sonoma County Code and the 38-volume California Code of Regulations. Sebastopol resident Carl Malamud put the laws online in hopes California and other governments will drop their claim to copyright.

But if you want to download and save those laws to your computer, forget it.

The state claims copyright to those laws. It dictates how you can access and distribute them -- and therefore how much you'll have to pay for print or digital copies.

It forbids people from storing or distributing its laws without consent.

That doesn't sit well with Carl Malamud, a Sebastopol resident with an impressive track record of pushing for digital access to public information. He wants California -- and every other federal, state and local agency -- to drop their copyright claims on law, contending it will pave the way for innovators to create new ways of searching and presenting laws.

"When it comes to the law, the courts have always said there can be no copyright because people are obligated to know what it says," Malamud said. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse in court."

Malamud is spoiling for a major legal fight.

He has begun publishing copies of federal, state and county codes online -- in direct violation of claimed copyright.

On Labor Day, he posted the entire 38-volume California Code of Regulations, which includes all of the state's regulations from health care and insurance to motor vehicles and investment.

To purchase a digital copy of the California code costs $1,556, or $2,315 for a printed version. The state generates about $880,000 annually by selling its laws, according to the California Office of Administrative Law.

Malamud isn't just targeting California. He posted safety and building codes for nearly all 50 states, and some counties and cities such as Sonoma County and Los Angeles.

This is not uncharted territory for Malamud. In 1994, he pushed the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to post corporate filings online, opening the door for companies such as Google and Yahoo to create elaborate financial Web sites. In June, Malamud helped convince the state of Oregon to stop claiming copyright over its laws.

Now Malamud wants to do the same for California -- and everywhere else. And he's willing to go to court to make his point. He thinks the court system will rule in his favor, establishing a precedent that all government agencies must follow.

"If that happens, it opens the doors to innovation," Malamud said.

To get the California Code online, he digitally scanned a stack of documents that weighed 150 pounds. Now anyone can download the 33,000 pages, and print whatever they want from his Web site, public.resource.org.

Traditionally, governments provided publishing companies such as LexisNexis copies of laws to print and bind for people. It was practically the only way to get the laws distributed to people. LexisNexis claims to have the "world's largest collection of public records."

But the Internet has changed how people can share information. Increasingly, government agencies -- including Sonoma County -- contract with LexisNexis and other publishers to post their laws online.

"Most of the county staff now just look up the codes on the Internet," said Jennifer Barrett, Sonoma County's deputy planning director. "You can quickly search for keywords or a section. It's quite easy to find what you are looking for."

But LexisNexis does not format the online laws for easy printing or downloading, Malamud said. And that hampers how people can access the laws.

LexisNexis is the exclusive distributor of Sonoma County statutes, selling print versions for $220. It offers free access to the county's codes on the Internet, but its Web site is relatively archaic and doesn't include the features common in newer sites.

If the county provided those laws in a free, standardized digital format, others could design Web sites with more modern search and presentation features, Malamud said. Social Web sites could pop up where, for instance, plumbers could provide useful annotations to building codes -- perhaps blending Wikipedia with Facebook for a more useful law site.

LexisNexis declined to comment for this story. Its primary competitor, Thomson West, which publishes California laws under a contract with the state, does not claim copyright over government statutes, a spokesman said.

California asserts copyright protections for its laws, contending it ensures the public gets accurate, timely information while generating revenue for the state.

"We exercise our copyright to benefit the people of California," said Linda Brown, deputy director of the Office of Administrative Law, which manages the state's laws. "We are obtaining compensation for the people of California."

Malamud must get permission from the state to post codes online, Brown said. She was not familiar with Malamud's actions, and could not comment on what steps would be taken to protect the state's copyright.

Malamud might be seriously outgunned in regards to the financial and legal resources of the governments he is facing. But Malamud has a track record of defeating much larger foes, said Lawrence Lessig, a professor at Stanford Law School and founder of its Center for Internet and Society.

"I think his work is extraordinarily important," Lessig said.

While there is a lot of commercial interest in stopping Malamud, his strategy of showing how easy it is for governments to post laws themselves makes a strong argument to the public, Lessig said.

Malamud thinks it will take him another three years to establish that no one can assert copyright over any U.S. law.

Like in his previous battles, he's not going it alone. His nonprofit has received about $2 million so far, with money coming from Internet pioneers such as the foundation of Pierre Omidyar, who founded eBay. Malamud expects it will take several million more to finish his campaign.

He also has some heavy-hitting legal academics on his side.

Professor Pamela Samuelson, co-director of the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, has also questioned the legality of copyrighting standards and laws.

"If it's the law, the public should have access to it," she said.

Samuelson points out that the idea of copyright was established to provide people incentive to create. People are given exclusive legal rights to their paintings, writings and other works because by selling those rights they can attempt to make a living.

There is no similar need for financial incentives to establish standards such as building codes, Samuelson said. For the most part, volunteers spend long hours drafting proposed standards for things like plumbing and building. Governments often take those standards and adopt them into law.

Once the standards become law, she doesn't think people can claim copyright protections. But like Malamud, she sees the courts making the final ruling.

"I don't think it's an airtight case for either side. But I think the law favors that if something is a law, it's in the public domain," she said.

You can reach Staff Writer Nathan Halverson at 521-5494 or nathan.halverson@pressdemocrat.com.


Comments

  1. seeitoldyouso says...
    September 3, 2008 6:43:42 am

    RE: Link

    The cliche' "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse", was a reasonable judicial attitude to adhere to in days long passed by, but not anymore:

    1. Not only are there too many laws on the books now, many of these are "stupid laws, enacted by idiots, who were put in office by morons".

    2. To have to retain a lawyer for consultation, spend a year at the library, or make a large cash outlay, just to know "for sure" you're not breaking one of those "stupid laws", is patently offsesive (or, would that be properly "copy-rightly offensive"?)Cheers to Malamud for picking up that fight!

    3. We also have a Bureaucarcy, that now has the arrogance to legislate, investagate, prosecute, AND NOW EVEN EXACT PUNISHMENT their own sets of law. Just ask John Gilmore about the TSA's "Secret Law"..

    Wake up!

  2. uncle10 says...
    September 3, 2008 7:12:53 am

    I believe the state cannot claim right to the laws because the laws are the ownership of the people. The state enacts the laws as the agent (employee) of the people. The police services enforce the laws as an agent (again, employee) of the people.
    Any judge that decides otherwise needs to be fired.

  3. svo says...
    September 3, 2008 7:36:49 am

    The state can claim whatever it wants. It never has been too concerned about whether its claims are sensible. I am trusting Malamud to hammer the smallest shred of sense into the politicians' tiny brains.

  4. Zumabtrancas says...
    September 3, 2008 12:34:12 pm

    I suggest he also print the Constitution and give it to the Judges in Sonoma County and Judges of the Nutty Ninth so they can read it for the first time in their lives.

    It would be asking too much of those groups to understand it, but it at least creates a starting point>

  5. paulse says...
    September 3, 2008 3:33:36 pm

    morons all the way to the bank. All laws are written by legislators, lawyers, and in some cases special interest groups (lawyers). they are written in such a manner that only lawyers can figure out the system and only lawyers work out the system to work out how and when it works. judges are ex-politicos, aka ex-lawyers.

    But there is a solution and it takes work. Legislators are allergic to real work, but this has to get done. It can be started by the public, as ex-owners of the laws (real owners defrauded by the state and feds), claim ownership. Demand that every fixer law have a sunset date where it is no longer law, and the whole body of state laws be scrutinized based on need for the law. Nobody, not even all lawyers, has it all down, it is like a big circus/temple where money changers and religious officials declare morals and fees, and take money for pardon of the law in advance. It can be fixed if it can be scrutinized. The electorate thinks the public is dumber than pee because it fools us so much, but we are usually just to bust surviving. We can do it.

  6. theemailman says...
    September 3, 2008 3:37:14 pm

    Why did not I read anything that the PD News is doing about this??? An artical is a start but!

  7. paulse says...
    September 3, 2008 3:54:06 pm

    The building codes were downloadable when I was an inspector. The CA codes are pretty much copied from the NEC, UMC, UPC, etc (uniform plumbing and mechanical and national electric).

    Wording is only slightly changed. The codes are written and copywrited, but they are not law until a jurisdiction (like a city or county) adopts them, where the argument of ownership begins. It used to be cheap to buy them. For a while, when construction was the only viable industry (health is not an industry) that was working in America, everybody started gaming the system to make money, a box of screws became a packet of screws, a cheap book became expensive, fees skyrocketed and building dept officials ruled. When a city adopts a code as law, the public has a right to that law. The problem is that there are so many different sets of building codes that a city could adopt one set, and a county another. Many jurisdictions are ten years behind and many inspectors are just test takers with little experience, often not even understanding the reasoning behind the code article. But the public should be able to access free all public documents for the protection of their rights.

    The public should also be allowed to force changes to poorly written or special interest laws, to erase laws that are patently out of date and a hindrance to making sense of the codes. This is true of codes and penal statutes as well.

    This is the time, while the economy is slow, to make corrections.

  8. collinsfriend says...
    September 3, 2008 6:07:32 pm

    The quickest (and riskiest) way to get the documents free and available online forever is for someone to commit a crime (victimless) and then sue the state for prosecuting them for a law they could have no access to since only lawyers and the govt agencies have access. Lawyers also have to pay for copies-but they make the money back. It is inconceivable an average citizen could be expected to pay thousands, or millions just to protect themselves from the ignorance of the law angle of prosecution. It seems that would lead to some kind of unlawfulness to hold people responsible for laws they refuse to divulge freely.

Next Article in Business-Home

  • Tegal buying Alcatel technology

    Petaluma's Tegal Corp., which makes equipment for manufacturing computer chips, announced a deal Tuesday to acquire the technology of a French company that builds systems for fabricating next-generation integrated circuits.
    Tegal will pay $5...