I didn't miss anything. I've researched this extensively--see the lawsuit against the AO referenced in my other comment on this thread. The Act specifies "only

I didn't miss anything. I've researched this extensively--see the lawsuit against the AO referenced in my other comment on this thread. The Act specifies "only to the extent necessary" and "reasonable" fees. $0.10 per page is not supported as being "necessary" or "reasonable" by any legal scholar, economist, or other source. It's an arbitrary round number that is in no way based on the cost of bandwidth, which is zero at the margin. Therefore the present fees are not legally permitted. The only fees permitted are so small they don't even register; in other words, the fees are not permitted. Nor am I "throwing around terms." There is a law; the judiciary is violating it willfully. They are taking money from citizens with no legal basis; that is typically referred to as conversion or theft, which is criminal. If you want to get into semantics, check your definition of "federal agency." The courts don't qualify according to some precedent, which is part of why we have this mess. Otherwise the Administrative Procedure Act would apply and force some accountability.