Is there no list online for this?

Seems like the author is going out of his way to create controversy. He can't figure out the zip codes in one county in Oregon without help from the post office? I doubt the restaurants that report the zip codes have any official assistance.

The point is that this is extremely useful public data. Since so many things in daily life besides just shipping require an address, this information should really be in the commons.

The issue here is that their quote is in government-speak that not everyone can understand. Translated into plain English:

"proprietary business information" means "this nation's copyright and patent systems are horribly and possibly irrevocably broken and many government departments are so unaccountable they feel so entitled and lawless they care more about making their jobs easy than serving the people paying their salaries."

When you read it that way everything makes sense.

EDIT: many posts on whether the USPS is government or not. I hope we don't lose sight of the forest of bureaucracies large and entrenched enough to skirt accountability and twist IP laws in ways the Constitution never intended while focusing on that tree. That is, the details of its connection to the government don't change its behavior.

The USPS isn't a government department.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

"The United States Postal Service (USPS), also known as the Post Office and U.S. Mail, is an independent agency of the United States federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution."

If the US constitution is how you're created, you're given a monopoly on delivering mail in the US, and you're governed by Congress, you're part of the US government.

Would you define the Federal Reserve as part of the government?

Yes.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve's activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government" rather than "independent of government."

You're being pedantic. Since the 1970s, the USPS is supposed to be revenue-neutral, by law. This is a direct rebuttal to the simplistic "I already done paid for it with meh tax dollers!" argument that appears to be carrying the day in this discussion. The past history and current management structure of the postal service is completely irrelevant to the debate.

The only tax subsidy the USPS receives is to fund things like free mail for the blind, election mail, and other "public good" services. They charge for the zip code database because it's a product that can make them revenue (which they desperately need), and it is, in fact, a proprietary invention of the USPS.

You're being disingenous. Congress maintains not only their monopoly on first-class mail delivery, but also control over key financial decisions. I don't see a lot of private companies that provide Congress with authority over themselves

So, what's the problem with that, exactly?

It's not a problem. The argument is that if they're part of the US government, they're required to release the information requested under the Freedom Of Information Act. USPS is trying to make the case that they're a private business not connected to the US government (and hence, aren't required to comply with the FOIA), which clearly is not true.

It's a US government institution, sure. Arguing about that (or focusing on it) misses the real point about how they're different from a lot of government agencies, which has everything to do with why they're acting grabby about IP like a business.

As the Wikipedia article notes, since 1971 it's been a corporation-like independent agency that's essentially unsupported by taxes. Since then it was supposed to operate in the black and it did for a long time, until it got hit by increased competition in traditional delivery services, digital communications... and the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (which both keeps it from offering new "non-postal" services and gives it new obligations like prefunding healthcare obligations 75 years into the future).

I don't think treating zip or other geoinfo they've got as proprietary is a great idea, because it could be used to create a lot of value if it was let out on its own. But the value it has makes it a potential revenue source, and given the obligations and limited options they have, I can understand why they feel like they'd have to capture some of the value they've created.

I'm not a constitutional scholar, whatever that even means, but I've always wondered why the authority "To establish Post Offices and Post Roads" is interpreted as the authority to forcefully implement a monopoly on postal service (now, just a near-monopoly on first-class mail).

I've always wondered why the authority "To establish Post Offices and Post Roads" is interpreted as the authority to forcefully implement a monopoly on postal service

Generally, all the powers in Art. I, Section 8 ("To raise armies", "To provide and maintain a navy", "To borrow money on the credit of the United States") are read that way, though the only one that has express exclusion language is the power to legislate over the national capital district.

The USPS used to be a clear-cut government agency, but has been quasi-privatized. Congress cut its taxpayer funding, and directed it to run itself like a business, not like a public service. Accordingly, you are incorrect about who are the "people paying their salaries": the USPS has not received any taxpayer money since its funding was cut to zero in the early 1980s. It now funds itself like a business, by charging fees and, like any other business, exploiting intellectual property where the opportunity arises. In that sense it's more like a regulated utility, like Comcast or PG&E, having been privatized in all but name.

Ultimately whether it's a public service that should act in the public interest, or an organization that should be run as a business, is a policy decision that's up to Congress to decide. And Congress decided on the 2nd. Given that, exploiting the zipcode database as proprietary IP seems in line with the letter and the spirit of their (current) mandate.

the USPS has not received any taxpayer money since its funding was cut to zero in the early 1980s.

Not quite true, its received public funding since then, but that's specifically tied to costs associated with, IIRC, overseas absentee ballots.

Yes, but that is payment for work done. At best, they are a government contractor.

They do not pay taxes. They are also not subject to many regulations other businesses face, and of course they are more famous for not having to adhere to parking laws.

They are forced to prefund their pensions unlike other government agencies but like private companies.

the truth of their problem is that mail service is declining, stats show it at 213 billion in 2006 down to 160 billion letters in 2012. That is a major decline in revenue.

Even if the Post Office did not have to fund its pensions it loses billions of dollars a year. If they did not fund their pensions and those pensions ended up negative the tax payers would step in.

Also consider.

1. the Post Office when negotiating with its unions cannot factor in the operational costs of the contract. As in, they cannot factor in the impact of it in day to day expenditures versus revenue.

2. The Post Office also has 535 overseers, as in Congress who can stop them from closing unprofitable offices, distribution centers, and the like. They even like to interfere with vehicle purchases. Anecdote, I remember my Aunt and Cousin (both ran local offices) bemoaning the left hand drive Windstars they had to take.

3. The EU even requires member nations to open their markets to competition, the US does not permit direct competition in letter delivery.

4. They have to plead to raise stamp costs.

The USPS has the massive benefit of government-protected monopoly on first-class mail. Even if it's not a direct infusion of funds, it's a major subsidy.

Exactly. Try delivering your own mail through mailboxes and mail slots and see what happens.

Whether that's a net subsidy or anti-subsidy is an interesting question. They have both a monopoly and a fairly stringent mandate: they are required to deliver first-class mail to every mailing address in the United States (including very remote areas), six days a week, at prices that they can't set. The estimates I've seen are that the first-class mail mandate is a net money-loser, with pre-sorted bulk mail and premium services like Priority Mail the more successful products. So the USPS might actually be financially better off without this "subsidy". But Alaska and Montana senators would have a fit if rural communities lost mail service.

Indeed. We see what the market price for delivering a letter quickly across the country is: about $20 from Fedex. USPS can only charge 46 cents by law, the cheapest first-class mail service in the world.

You failed to mention Fedex does it much faster, has insurance and tracking. It's not apple-to-apple comparison.

The more than 40x price difference is not all about speed, insurance, and tracking. No private service would providing first class mail delivery without cutting off service to unprofitable rural areas or jacking up the price significantly. Or, more likely, both.

I thought we needed the State to protect us from monopolies? There must be a certain amount of double-think that goes into this line of reasoning. But yeah, remove the monopoly on first-class mail and let them charge differently if they'd like. Let other services compete with them. It's unfair for those living in remote areas? Well, I guess everyone should be charged the same for real estate regardless of location to make it "fair."

Congress cut its taxpayer funding, and directed it to run itself like a business, not like a public service.

Not really. Congress forced the PO to run itself like no other business or government entity with the goal of ruining it. The 109th Congress wanted to promote the belief government can't do anything efficiently. It was called the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act and intentionally places huge burdens on the USPS which no other business has. Without those, estimates show the PO would still be hurting, but no where near its current state. So Bush can say "Mission Accomplished" about one thing and be right about it.

While it is true the USPS has requirements that no other business has, it also has benefits that no other business has. These include, but are not limited to:

* A box for its use at every residence in the United States

* A federal monopoly; it is unlawful for any company to carry a letter in the United States and charge a similar price to USPS rates. See here: http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/welcome.htm

Businesses aren't subject to FOIAs. If they're a business, why did they even respond? Given that they have responded, they are not a private business (of course). The USPS response here is shameful and we (Americans) should change it!

Assuming by "the people paying their salaries" you mean "taxpayers", then you're incorrectly assuming that USPS is paid for by taxpayers. It isn't - it's got to pay its own way by selling goods and services. In that respect it's a lot more like a business.

So your translation of "proprietary business information" is erroneous. A more accurate one would be, "Shit we ain't giving away for free. This ain't no charity, bub."

USPS has maintained a substantial deficit for some time. It is, therefore, subsidized by taxpayers.

    The USPS lost US$ 15.9 billion in 2012, and its revenue was US$ 65.2 billion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

And this leads down the rabbit hole into the argument about Congress forcing USPS to advance-fund its pensions in a way no other government agency is required to, and which many argue is A) the source of practically all of the deficit, and B) was a deliberate move by members of Congress who wanted the USPS to become money-losing so as to make a stronger case for privatizing it.

Which, when you think about it, makes no sense at all.

If running a postal service that reaches all of the country is a money losing proposition, that's a terrible reason to privatize it, if you think it's in the national benefit to have a postal service.

FedEx and UPS put lots of money behind forcing the USPS to pre-fund union pensions. The goal was to both weaken the postal service, which was trying to move into "fast" shipments (1-2 day vs. the usual week+), and demonstrate that unions were bad for businesses in the delivery industry.

The American Postal Workers Union is against the law that requires USPS to pre-fund pensions.

http://www.apwu.org/news/webart/2011/11-015-prcletter-paea_r...

I don't see how this is relevant.

If running a postal service that reaches all of the country is a money losing proposition, that's a terrible reason to privatize it, if you think it's in the national benefit to have a postal service.

Your analysis assumes the public implementation is equivalent with a private one.

The reality is that without the enforced monopoly of the USPS and the Congress to protect it, a private business would be profitable.

They'd also charge more to achieve it.

But that's Capitalism, and by all means mail is most likely artificially priced far below what the market would naturally support.

For OP: here's a commercial source, but read the disclaimers and ToS:

http://www.unitedstateszipcodes.org/

For all, background info on the USPS budget/deficit:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/nocera-its-d-day-f...

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-872T

Imagine for a moment working for a company that had had been in business for 220+ years, had policy and procedure manuals that reflected every year of the history, had thousands of physical locations, delivered to millions of locations many times per week, and had 535 people on the board of directors (in the sense of trying to micro-manage whatever they felt like sticking their oar into.)

I find it somewhat amazing that the USPS can still deliver mail across the country for less than 50 cents, let alone all the other stuff they can handle - ever been shipped a hive of bees by mail? It's in the Domestic Mail Manual, under Bees http://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/601.htm

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles2013/main - Select ZIP code tabulation areas from the dropdown.

They're not perfect, but they're almost definitely good enough for the author's purposes.

More info on how the Census Bureau creates them: http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/zctas.html (they take a surprisingly circuitous route)

Wait, USPS is a privately owned entity? If not, aren't products of government entities public by default? Therefore, any proprietary information is owned by the public, isn't it?

Or did I completely misunderstand the whole thing?

Tell that to the NSA. They just Cease&Desist'd on intellectual property grounds someone who made a satirical t-shirt using their logo.

Currently, it's kind of semi-privatized: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Reorganization_Act

But Congress still has oversight over it, and it's legally obligated to service all Americans.

There are some people who think we should go further, and fully privatize it: http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/usps

Am I missing something here that prevents the use of the Google Maps API for postal code look ups[1]?

https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/geocoding/

There was a post on HN a while ago explaining why people should be building / using alternatives to google for geo stuff. The largest reason being that MANY uses are against the TOS of the google geocoding API. Particularly, I think, anything that's not user-facing and free/freely available. I can't seem to dig up a link, but a the case is made here (though not as well): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_...

EDIT: found it http://petewarden.com/2013/09/09/why-you-should-stop-piratin...

Canada Post is currently trying to assert a similar ownership over our postal codes. See http://geocoder.ca/?sued=1 or http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/canada-post-sues-over-post... for more details.

Really messed up. Geocoder.ca crowd-sourced a database of Postal Code -> lat/long information, and have been giving it away for years. Even some government organizations use their data, and yet our postal service is trying to shut them down to drive customers towards their $5,000/year + many strings attached product.

Author thinks he needs the ZIP code database that is "updated daily," but he provides no reason for this and he's not willing to pay for it. Looks like he's the one being unreasonable here; ZIP codes are a solved problem.

Why should he pay for something that is a product of the federal government? It's already paid for, by the salaries of those who maintain the data, which would be maintained anyway since its required for USPS operations.

Presumably those salaries were paid with the expectation that some of that money would be recuperated through private sales. I guess it sort of makes sense that only businesses who use the information have to pay, instead of making every taxpayer bear the burden.

Someone should just create an open source project, host that on Github and call it a day. This is disgusting.

I wasn't really aware that zip codes change much..

As far as I am aware, if I put in slightly the wrong zip code (neighboring one) but the right address, I'll still will get the package.

I think that if you send a letter to say, Washington St., Boston MA, (of which there are several) you'd better have the correct zip code.

Yeah, I am used to small communities or a grid systems in dense population, like 305 E 900 N #42

Your point is completely valid in these other contexts though.

The USPS is often pretty good at getting mis-addressed mail to people anyway, in general.

Similar issues plagued the UK postal code databases. So much so that Wikileaks eventually leaked the database

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/UK_government_database_of_all_1,84...

I'm not sure if things have improved since, but it's probably not going to get better now that Royal Mail is 48% private.

There is a pretty good effort to reverse engineer it all:

http://www.freethepostcode.org/

Edit: actual dataset here: http://www.freepostcodes.org.uk/ - link above wrong.

It doesn't look like it's been updated in a while, and many of the links are busted :(

It plagued and still plagues. The Royal Mail is ruthless when it comes to IP of UK's post codes (read US zip code). Every "little guy" who dare tryed come up with ways around it were and still are crushed with C&D or plain old take downs followed be a gagging order. Myself included.

This is weird, I just read a random article [1] about a guy getting sued for publishing some banking public routing numbers. The article writer then jokingly said: "This argument is like the Post Office suing you for posting a list of zip codes."

[1] http://www.popehat.com/2013/11/05/fine-those-routing-numbers...

I'd personally be a little happier if people besides the post office stopped using ZIP codes.

Basically, ZIP codes are not maps. ZIP codes are (collections of) delivery routes. You can then reverse engineer a map more-or-less from the collections of addresses in a ZIP code, but it's messy and not necessarily meaningful.

If post offices were as plentiful as they are in (say) Manhattan, ZIP codes are a good proxy for location. If you live outside a major city, not so much. My parents live about 15 miles from the post office from which their ZIP code derives; my house used to be about a half mile from its post office, but that one was shut down (for mail delivery -- still exists for PO boxes), so now I'm attached to a ZIP code for the post office two towns over.

This matters, because if you do any sort of map-business off of ZIP codes, instead of political boundaries, the results are crap.

So death to ZIP codes.

According to the USPS website, API usage is free here: https://www.usps.com/business/web-tools-apis/list-of-apis.ht...

One of the API's relates to zip codes.

Looks like USPS API data is free and usable only for package shipping. Not that I bet they would notice. At any rate, this seems to be a great start with a great API recommendation: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7129313/zip-code-lookup-a...

Sorry to keep replying, I don't have an edit button for some reason. This one is cool too: http://api.zippopotam.us/us/ma/belmont

I found a town called Bakersfield that has more than one zip fro the town, it does JSON back with more data than I thought would be part of free plan.

For some reason I could not get "san_francisco","san-francisco", "sanfrancisco", or "sf" to work.

I wonder where $3k/yr number came from. This is a price for "Z4Change Product" product which "Provides mailers the information necessary to create an application that would facilitate frequent and cost-effective processing for updating very large computerized mailing lists for automation compatibility and improved deliverability."

Is this so necessary for mapping health inspections data? USPS has more fitting products priced less.

It's the only data they'd offer me which contains the complete list of zip codes mapped to cities.

Zip codes make my life hell on a daily basis. The problem is essentially that the USPS does not design topological zipcode polygons. All they do is maintain a set of centroids, plus an assignment to a set of lines representing street segments (which they charge for).

This would be fine, if it was not for the fact that pretty much everyone who wants to use zip codes needs them in a topologically valid polygon format. This is a problem because roads change all the time, and this makes zip codes terribly unstable. Also, there are many zip codes that are really just points (a bit of an oversimplification, but military bases, prisons, schools, etc. often cause huge problems).

Census tracts are much more stable (topologically valid and only change every 10 years). Unfortunately, most people don't know which census tract they live in, so zips prevail. I have built several geocoding algorithms, and it always comes down to the data being the big PITA. What ends up happening, unfortunately, is that private companies pick up the slack and create topological zip codes (with high price tags).

Double unfortunately, every company has a different methodology in creating these polygons, costing everyone who uses them big money, on top of the licensing fees. The USPS could easily produce a standard set of polygons for an extra couple grand a year in labor and save the industry millions. I cannot get into much detail, but I know this issue quite intimately.