On 10/18/96, Carl Oppedahl <carl[_at_]oppedahl.com> said:
>
> But that's not what anybody is talking about here. What people are
> talking about here is whether the implied license granted by someone
> who files a brief in court, which permits anti-tyranny inspection and
> personal copying of court papers, also necessarily extends to allowing
> profit-making entities to make profit by charging, directly or
> indirectly, for disks or books or databases that compile briefs.
As soon as the Database protection legislation is passed, the likely result is that the lawyer will get nothing, the databse company will have something better than copyright, and lawyers will pay them to use others' briefs.
Isn't this a desired result?<g>
Regards,
John Lederer
<johnl[_at_]ibm.net>
Received on Mon Oct 21 1996 - 03:36:08 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:22 GMT