December 11, 2013
Who is Shyster?
Or you can search by:
Most Recent Comments
Mike Hargrove Interview (13)
Can they be the California Angels again? (9)
Another great moment in mass transit? (7)
Just another ten-percenter (his mind is like an ocean) (7)
Great Moments in Half-Baked Populism (8)
Shyster's Daily Circuit
Joe Posnanski Blog
Cot's Baseball Contracts
It IS About the Money
Baseball Think Factory
MLB Trade Rumors
Way Back and Gone
Bats -- NYT Baseball Blog
The Biz of Baseball
The Daily Fungo
The Common Man
Jorge Says No!
Baseball Over Here
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
CRS Report on the Curt Flood ActLegislation geeks -- and I know you exist and read this blog -- will be interested to know that the Congressional Research Service (i.e. the outfit which does all of Congress's research) is working to make its reports available to the public. One of the reports made public last week was the report that ultimately led to the enactment of the Curt Flood Act of 1998, which stripped the owners of its antitrust exemption in the area of labor matters.
Like the steroid stuff, you'll either think it's really cool or it will bore you to tears, but I made it my mission long ago to bother everyone at one time or another, so there you are.
(thanks to reader Redsauce for the link)
Posted by Craig Calcaterra at 2:42pm
Andy L said...
The Curt Flood Act, however, is toothless. Although the antitrust exemption was stripped, the labor exemption remains. In order for suit to be brought, a player would have to leave the union or the MLBPA would have to decertify itself as a union.
Sorry, but I just read A Well-Paid Slave by Brad Snyder (who teaches at my law school).
Posted 02/10 at 06:02 PM
Mike Masnick said...
Heh. To be quite clear, this is NOT CRS “working to make its reports available to the public.” CRS has, in fact, worked quite hard to keep its works OUT of public view, despite the fact that they are technically public domain.
This was a flat out leak. Someone who does want the info public leaked over $1 billion worth of research to both wikileaks (who you link to) and opencrs.
The content is legal… but it was most certainly not the doing of CRS, who wants to keep as much of this underwraps as possible
Posted 02/10 at 07:48 PM