On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Dwight Hines <hunger99[_at_]aol.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Steven D. Jamar <sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > The Supreme Court just decided that the commerce clause argument does
> > not protect the patent law from Eleventh Amendment immunity by states.
> > The same reasoning should apply to the copyright act and perforce to
> > neighboring rights.
> >
> > But the approach of protecting neighboring rights based on the commerce
> > clause may work as to private folk.
>
> Please give a specific cite to the case you referred to.
FLORIDA PREPAID POSTSECONDARY ED. EXPENSEBD. v. COLLEGE SAVINGS BANK http://caselaw.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=98-531
COLLEGE SAVINGS BANK v. FLORIDA PREPAIDPOSTSECONDARY ED. EXPENSE BD. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=98-149
Diane Cabell
http://www.mama-tech.com/
Fausett, Gaeta & Lund, LLP
Boston, MA
Received on Wed Jul 28 1999 - 03:23:26 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:36 GMT