Not if he paid for a copy of the report. Then he's just selling copies. Like taking a photo of the white house and selling it. Only... You didn't take the photo... So is like you bought the photo negatives... Only... He didn't buy the original master report... So it's kind of like licensing the image... Only he didn't license the right to sell the copies... So it's more like-
Isn't that profiting by selling government property?
Not if he paid for a copy of the report. Then he's just selling copies. Like taking a photo of the white house and selling it. Only... You didn't take the photo... So is like you bought the photo negatives... Only... He didn't buy the original master report... So it's kind of like licensing the image... Only he didn't license the right to sell the copies... So it's more like-
Okay yeah, it's probably totally illegal.
Maybe legal under parody laws. What a joke.
do congressmen have to pay for the reports?? What if he just got one and had a staffer photocopy it?
That sounds like exploitation!