Re: Michigan case draws

From: Alan Sugarman <sugarman[_at_]hyperlaw.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 09:30:40 -0500 (EST)

Dan:

Not only does Emory claim a copyright, but the introductory pages bear the official mulit-colored seals (in a graphics file) of the courts issuing the opinions and Emory claims to be the designated Internet disseminator for those courts. Emory also claims on these pages that the opinions are being provided with the special cooperation of the courts involved.

The question is whether the courts (for example the First Circuit) should let their seals be misused in this manner. I just do not think copyrighted versions of case law should be disseminated under the seal or imprimatur of a court.

Is Emory the "West of the South?"

Alan

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Alan D. Sugarman        Federal Appeals on Disc tm CD-ROM ::
President               Opinions of US Courts of Appeals  ::
                        1993 to Date - All Circuits       :: 
HyperLaw, Inc.  ®                                     :: 
P.O. Box 1176	        DO NOT SHORT CIRCUIT YOUR CLIENTS ::
New York, NY 10023    	                                  ::
sugarman[_at_]hyperlaw.com   212-787-2812   212-496-4138(fax)  ::
                                                          ::
               ///    ///    ///                          ::
              ///    ///    ///                           ::
             ///    ///    ///                            ::
      ////////////////    ///                             ::
     ////////////////    ///                              ::
          ///    ///    ///                               ::
         ///    ///    ///////////                        ::
        ///    ///    ///////////               ®     ::
                                                          ::


::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

<---- Begin Included Message ---->

> Date: 09 Mar 96 15:23:17 EST
> From: Spectrum Press <73774.2733[_at_]compuserve.com>
> Reply-To: cni-copyright[_at_]cni.org
> Sender: owner-cni-copyright[_at_]cni.org
> Subject: Re: Michigan case draws
> To: cni-copyright[_at_]cni.org
> 
> 
> Alan Sugarman wrote:
> > 
> > But remember ... Emory copyrights the HTML version of this opinion 
> > and you may not use if for commercial purposes ... at least that is 
> > what Emory Law School claims.
> 
> There can be no special copyright in an "HTML version" of any public 
> domain work.
> 
> Here is the above paragraph in an HTML version:
> 
> But remember ... Emory copyrights the HTML version of this opinion<br>
> and you may not use if for commercial purposes ... at least that is<br> 
> what Emory Law School claims.<p>
> 
> Here is the same paragraph in another HTML version:
> 
> <pre>
> But remember ... Emory copyrights the HTML version of this opinion 
> and you may not use if for commercial purposes ... at least that is 
> what Emory Law School claims.
> </pre>
> 
> The various possible HTML tags are all utilitarian, completely without 
> originality.  They specify line breaks, paragraph indents, fonts, etc.
> The idea that one can wrap a public domain text in HTML tags and have 
> the total copyright protected is idiotic, and Emory University is doing 
> the public a great disservice with spurious copyright claims -- and from 
> a law school!  What exactly do they think is protected?  The placement 
> of the tags?
> 
> 
> Dan Agin
> ===========================================
> Spectrum Press Inc.
> http://users.aol.com/specpress/index.html
> 71022.251[_at_]compuserve.com
> 

<---- End Included Message ----> Received on Wed Mar 13 1996 - 14:30:06 GMT