« Comments DUE TODAY to Dept. of Homeland Security on REAL ID | Main | Smithsonian's control of PD images »


Mary, thanks, that looks great! I appreciate it. And to return the favor, off topic and I haven't read this yet, but it looks like it may be of interest:


to Klaus - very interesting - did you make a post or comment on the Smithsonian memo on your blog? Did you see this: http://blog.librarylaw.com/librarylaw/2007/04/minow_the_centr_1.html ... another side.

to safelibraries: try http://blog.librarylaw.com/librarylaw/2007/03/law_for_librari.html

Offtopic here but not in the blog:

The Smithsonian image action at

A comment on the legal issue would be fine.

Let ask a question then. Regarding letting people know the facts, the ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom repeatedly refused me access to the "Lawyers for Libraries" training class given today. The OIF used repeated hurdles raised again and again to keep me out. Ultimately the last hurdle was keep in wait for weeks until the last day of sign up so it would be impossible for me to jump another hurdle.

Why is the ALA demanding access to government information while at the same time denying people access to ALA information, and doing so in an unprofessional manner?

Assuming that's too wide open a question, let me ask another. Can the ALA be taken seriously in its quest for government information when it acts to keep people out of its own business?

Would any lawyer who attending "Lawyers for Libraries" in Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love, but not for the OIF, be willing to provide me with a copy of the handouts? I'll pay for it and shipping, etc.

I really have an interest in the matter and have no clue why the ALA would exclude me, unless....

Well, since you wrote the article you did on that particular subject, freedom of information, I feel you won't mind if I ask these questions on this blog managed by experienced lawyers for libraries.


Law Student Blog

The comments to this entry are closed.