Re: copyright of briefs

On 10/11/96, Dennis Austin <daustin[_at_]law-lib.state.wi.us> said:
>
> A recent discussion on lawlib indicated that Bancroft-Whitney, a
> publisher of legal materials, decided to back out of a contract with the
> California Administrative Office of the Courts to put briefs filed by
> attorneys up on CD-ROM, stating that there was a copyright problem. It
> seems that the company believes that the individual lawyers who write
> the briefs have copyrights in them. This seems strange since the US
> Supreme Court briefs are routinely put online and available in
> microformats. Do briefs fall into the materials that are protected by
> copyright?
>
> Dennis Austin
> <daustin[_at_]law-lib.state.wi.us>

Isn't copyright working out well? Aren't we doing much to progress knowledge?

We have the Church of Scientology using copyright as a device to block discussion of its beliefs.

Now we seem to be having problems letting the public see the basis of government decisions.

In neither case is copyright providing a reward to the author to promote his writing more.

I really think we are off track in terms of accomplishing the purposes of copyright.

Regards,

John Lederer
<johnl[_at_]ibm.net>

Oregon, Wisconsin
(Leaves are changing and dropping. Some think this beautiful. We realists know what this portends) Received on Mon Oct 14 1996 - 14:30:16 GMT