Re: copyright of briefs

> On 10/11/9, Dennis Austin wrote:
> >
> > 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?
>
> I suggest the answer is "yes". I can't think of any reason, frankly,
> why the answer would not be "yes".

    Maybe they're technically copyrigthable, but wouldn't reprinting them certainly be a fair use? Can anyone provide even one reason why we should want to see filed briefs not made available to the public for copying? The federal courts seem to take the view that photocopying is fair use--most will photocopy briefs at your request (and charge you a per page copying fee). This is good, isn't it?

    Paul Heald
    <heald[_at_]jd.lawsch.uga.edu> Received on Wed Oct 16 1996 - 13:58:29 GMT