> Why doesn't the government make their own document? (Sorry this is a US-centric explanation, I don't really understand how the EU system works) Sometimes le

> Why doesn't the government make their own document? (Sorry this is a US-centric explanation, I don't really understand how the EU system works) Sometimes legislators say "We don't feel like having government employees write this particular set of regulations from scratch. Instead we'll make a law that says such-and-such a document written by a private organization is effectively promoted to a law." There are three separate questions here: (1) Should legislators promote documents to laws? (2) Should legislators be allowed to promote documents to laws? (3) If legislators do promote a document to a law, how should the legal system interpret that action? If you say "(1): No," then you should vote for a Congress / President that doesn't think it's okay to promote documents to laws. But sometimes a Congress / President might be elected that does think it's okay, and they might promote some documents to laws. US law currently says "(2): Yes." If you think it should say "(2): No" you probably need to change the system. I.e. pass a Constitutional amendment, which is extremely difficult, much harder than merely voting in a Congress / President that agrees with you. Good luck on that. That means it comes down to (3). Which is where I make the analogy with eminent domain. You had a document that people were paying you money for. The government made that document part of the law, and the law must be freely available, so now because of the government's actions, people aren't paying you money because a copy of your thing is now free. Sure, the government could have not promoted the document to a law. Or the system could be set up so the government isn't allowed to promote documents to laws. But those things that could have happened didn't happen. Instead, what actually happened is the government promoted your document to a law. Why didn't they make their own document instead of promoting yours? It doesn't matter at this point. They did promote your document, and they are allowed to do it under the current system. The obvious ways to resolve the conundrum are: (a) Make people pay to see the law, or (b) Make the law free and have the taxpayers compensate you for the lost revenue of the document, or (c) Make the law free and you just have to suck it up, too bad, so sad. (a) just feels icky because it effectively means the law is a secret. Penalizing people for violating laws they can't know about (without paying) seems pretty unfair and maybe violates some legal principles (due process maybe), I dunno the specifics, not a lawyer. (c) definitely seems wrong too because it seems like "the government took my stuff and didn't pay me for it" falls (or should fall) under eminent domain even if the thing the government took isn't land. That leaves (b), I can't really think of any other options