Re: "hot news" myth

On Tue, 27 May 1997, Dan Agin <specpress[_at_]earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> On 22 May 97, Robert Cumbow <cumbr[_at_]perkinscoie.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dan Agin <specpress[_at_]earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > News is not protected, only the expression of news is protected.
> >
> > This statement is true only in copyright analysis. The common law
> > tort of misappropriation is alive, if not entirely well, in many
> > jurisdictions.
> >
> > > So what are we talking about here? Is there such an entity as a
> > > "misappropriation" of a fact?
> >
> > There may very well be. That, at least, as I understand it, is the
> > point of this thread.
>
> And may very well NOT be. If tort law is in conflict with the
> Constitution, one must hope that tort law will get pummeled. The idea
> of a proprietary fact is so foreign to reason, it sounds disgusting.

Really??? What about trade secret law. That is all about proprietary facts.

Harold Federow
<hfederow[_at_]u.washington.edu> Received on Fri May 30 1997 - 19:33:37 GMT