Re: Re: Briefs On Westlaw/Lexis

It's been a long time, but I don't remember anything in the Princeton case holding that copying by the students would be fair use, but that they could not hire someone to do it for them. I would not emphasize fair use in my defense of Westlaw -- to the extent I relied on fair use, I would the fourth factor and contrast the availability of a licensing scheme for Princeton Univ. Press reprints against the lack of an alternative market for lawyers' used briefs -- but the fact that the students are "allowed" to make their own copies is because Princeton isn't going to bother suing them, and doesn't mean that it's fair use. The main difference between Princeton Univ. Press and a lawyer filing a brief is that the public is entitled to copy public records, and logically entitled to hire someone to do it for them.

John Noble

At 3:35 PM -0400 8/19/05, Roland Cole wrote:
>John et al.
>
>I read the Princeton University Press case as directly contrary to this one
>statement of John's. The fact that A is allowed to copy something does NOT
>mean that B can do it for A, with or without a payment to B.
>
>Now, if court pleadings are deemed "pledged to the public domain," the issue
>is moot. If they are deemed "licensed for copying and distribution" by the
>act of filing itself, then the question is the scope of the license. It
>could be held (as has been in some contexts) that the assumed license
>(and/or "fair use") is for the "scholar" to make one copy for further study.
>That understanding would NOT extend to selling copies to 3rd parties.
>
>On the other hand, much of the US works on the "do it until told no"
>principle, so I suspect West will provide this service until and unless they
>lose a court case over it.
>
>As John said elsewhere, the courts, maybe all the way to the Supreme Court,
>will have the final word.
>
>Roland J. Cole, J.D., Ph.D.
>Executive Director
>Software Patent Institute
>5315 Washington Blvd
>INDIANAPOLIS IN 46220-3062
>317-727-8940; cole[_at_]spi.org; www.spi.org
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
>[mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of JFN
>Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 3:41 PM
>To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
>Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Briefs On Westlaw/Lexis
>
>.... Assuming that the public has a right to inspect
>and copy court files, I can't see an infringement claim based on
>Westlaw providing that service for a fee.
>
>...
>
>John Noble
>
>
>
>#############################################################
>This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
>To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>
>To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org>
>Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
>Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
><https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
Received on Mon Aug 22 2005 - 21:00:00 GMT