You might think that there’s nothing a government won’t try. You’d be right. But I was near stupified to learn that the state of California copyrights its laws. And it’s not alone.

The state tries to control — through copyright — how you can access its laws, where and how you store them, etc. The state makes available its building codes, plumbing standards and criminal laws online, but requires you to ask for permission to download them!

The state’s out to make money. It charges $1,556 for a digital version, more for a print-out, and makes nearly a million dollars a year selling what is legally ours.

Yes, what’s ours. We are a nation of laws, not of men, and we have the right to own and reprint our laws as much as we want. The purpose of copyright is to ensure private parties can maintain some control over their intellectual property. But the laws themselves are, in point of elementary political theory, the intellectual property of all. Not of state bureaus.

Thankfully, heroic Internet technician and mover and shaker Carl Malamud believes in government transparency. And he, unlike Al Gore, really worked to help build the Internet.

On Labor Day Mr. Malamud published the whole California code online. Available for free.

Obviously, Malamud is spoiling for a fight. Good. He should win it. He has, after all, the law (if not the state) on his side.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Remember, remember the Fifth of September, when jurors freed Penn of the knot. I know of no reason why Penn’s jurors’ treason should ever be forgot.

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is one of three governors who have honored September 5, officially, as Jury Rights Day. From her 2007 proclamation we learn that 338 years ago, in the trial of William Penn, his jury refused to convict him of violating England’s Conventicle Acts, despite clear evidence that he acted illegally by preaching a Quaker sermon.

In acquitting Penn, the jury acted against the judge’s explicit instructions, perhaps spurred by the judge’s own illegality, not allowing Penn to make a defense. So the judge threw the jurors in prison, on September 5.

In my little ditty, my parody of the Guy Fawkes Day rhyme, I indicated Penn was in danger of hanging. I doubt that. It rhymes; that’s my excuse. But he was in danger of harsh imprisonment, at the very least, merely for gathering people so he could preach.

The jurors who resisted a bad law and a rogue judge risked a lot. But they not only freed Penn, who went on to found Pennsylvania, they established important principles to be found today in our Bill of Rights — and in the principle of jury nullification. They served justice by judging the law as well as the accused.

I know of no reason why Penn’s jurors’ “treason” should ever be forgot!

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Here’s another interesting court decision in Oklahoma. Oh, this time it’s not a petition with hundreds of thousands of voter signatures being tossed out. And no, it’s not quite as crazy as that ruling allowing a man to photograph up the skirts of girls at the mall.

This time Oklahoma’s highest court has ruled that former State Senator Gene Stipe is entitled to an $84,000 a year state pension.

Gene Stipe was a state legislator for 54 years, the longest in history. But in 2003, facing removal due to term limits and a federal indictment, Stipe resigned. He was then convicted on federal campaign violations and perjury.

Stipe also faces new charges of conspiracy, mail fraud, witness-tampering and illegal monetary transactions. Talk about an experienced legislator.

Oklahoma’s retirement system board ruled that Stipe’s crimes violated his oath of office. A 1981 law requires in such case the pension benefits are forfeit. But the Oklahoma Supreme Court decided otherwise, giving Stipe his full pension. The lone dissenter, Chief Justice Winchester, wrote “I would assert that tampering with an election goes to the very heart” of the oath of office.

Some wonder why Attorney General Drew Edmondson hasn’t investigated Stipe on state charges. But Stipe is a large contributor to Edmondson. When the AG was asked why he hadn’t returned Stipe’s money, Edmondson explained there was no conflict, since, after all, he wasn’t investigating Stipe.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.