> That argument misinterprets public records laws and is betrayed by its own logical conclusion: All it would take for the US government to prevent the disclosure of any information would be to place a high price tag on it. That clearly contradicts the intent of FOIA, which entitles the public to access all kinds of government records.<p>This is the only argument needed to persuade me that this is worth litigating and fighting for. The government is the only entity which can really aggregate this data. It is funded by tax payers. If it is not a matter of national security; which it isn't as it is sold openly, it should be free to the tax payer which foots the bill for its collection. It would be harrowing if FOIA requests cost 4-6 figures...
Man... when I contacted journalists about writing an article about my lawsuit against Chicago for the mayor's phone records, they all told me "tell us when you're done." and wouldn't touch it with ten foot pole. Very strange to see this getting attention after all that. That said, this is friggin' awesome. Best of luck to him!<p>My suit was eventually dropped after the judge essentially told Chicago to JFGI after their claims of burden in checking if a number is in public domain was costing the city a fortune and burden. It just took six months to get to that point and a year and a half in total...<p>Thankfully, I found a good reporter who's very interested in writing for me. My writing skills are just too shite for anything that public. :)
One of Fivethirtyeight's podcasts had Yanofsky on recently:<p><a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-to-access-government-data-on-immigration-only-173775/" rel="nofollow">http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-to-access-gover...</a>