Second Circuit Says Copyright Law Allows Google To Digitize And Index Published Works

Breaking news from the Second Circuit!  Here is the headnote for the just-released decision:

Plaintiff-appellants, who are authors of published books under copyright, appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Chin, J.) in favor of Defendant Google, Inc. Plaintiffs sued Google, alleging that its Library Project and Google Books project infringe Plaintiffs’ copyrights. Through these projects, Google makes and retains digital copies of books submitted to it by major libraries, allows the libraries that submitted a book to download and retain a digital copy, and allows the public to search the texts of the digitally copied books and see displays of snippets of text. The district court granted summary judgment based on its conclusion that Google’s copying is fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107 and is therefore not infringing. The Court of Appeals concludes that the defendant’s copying is transformative within the meaning of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 578-585 (1994), does not offer the public a meaningful substitute for matter protected by the plaintiffs’ copyrights, and satisfies § 107’s test for fair use. AFFIRMED.

It Ain’t Over Till It’s Over

No, I’m not referring to Yogi Berra’s recent passing.  No, I’m not referring to Lenny Kravitz’s 1991 song.  Yes, I am referring to the status of the death penalty in Connecticut.

Read the rest of this entry »

Connecticut Supreme Court Denies Reargument In Death Penalty Abolition Case

Over the strong dissent of three justices, the Connecticut Supreme Court today denied the State’s motion for reargument in State v. Santiago, the case decided last August which abolished the death penalty in Connecticut. Click here for my previous posts on the decision.

The denial of the motion for reargument is not unusual.  What is unusual is the written dissent from the ruling and its publication on the Judicial Branch’s website.  Decisions are always posted on the website; rulings on motions are not.

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s The First Monday In October. . . .

And that means the United States Supreme Court is back in session! Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing depends on your perspective; the court will decide some highly charged cases this year and those decisions are sure to delight–or enrage–depending on where you stand on the issues. Click below for a look at the upcoming term from several different perspectives:

Adam Liptak (New York Times)

Elizabeth Slattery (The Heritage Foundation)

Richard Wolf (USA Today)

Gabriel Malor (Hot Air)

A Death Penalty Hypothetical, Ctd.

Last week The CT Mirror ran my prior post, “A Death Penalty Hypothetical For The Connecticut Supreme Court, as an op-ed. It generated a comment from a person identified as “David Rosen.”  I assume this to be the always thoughtful attorney David Rosen from New Haven.  He makes a good point, to which I would like to respond.  Let me first restate the hypothetical I posed:

Read the rest of this entry »

ACLU Files Motion To Hold Kentucky Clerk In Contempt

Kim Davis is the Rowan County, Kentucky clerk (an elected position) who refuses to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because she says doing so offends her religious beliefs.  On August 12, 2015, a federal court granted certain plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction ordering Davis to comply with the law of the land and issue licenses to such couples.  She continues to argue that she has the right to flout the law because of her religious beliefs.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Lawyer Is A Champ Is Here!

Eleven years in the making, The Lawyer Is A Tramp Champ is Dan’s second album, following not-so-close on the heels of his 2004 CD, The Billable Hour Blues. Dan’s new album contains 13 new musical parodies (and one rocking instrumental) that help us lawyers remember not to take ourselves too seriously.  Most importantly, 100% of the proceeds from sales through December 31, 2015 will be donated to Connecticut legal aid organizations. Songs include:

• Rule 56
• Jailhouse Lawyer Blues
• You Make Me Feel (Like An Appellate Lawyer)
• Blackberry
• Graduation’s Near (Law School Debt I Fear)
• Uncollectible
• The Lady Is A Tramp Champ
• I’ve Got The Judge On A String (Wrapped Around My Finger)
• They All Laughed
• Sue Me
• The Commerce Clause! (Part One)
• The FOI! (The Freedom Of Information Song)
• Get A Life Wes Horton
• TGIF! (Instrumental)

Click here to listen to audio clips of each song and to buy the album (only $13.99) or individual songs (for only $1.29 each).

Discussing The Death Penalty On WNPR

Many thanks to John Dankosky and Colin McEnroe for having me on The Wheelhouse, WNPR’s weekly news roundtable, to discuss the Connecticut Supreme Court’s recent decision abolishing the death penalty.  Along with David McGuire, Legislative and Policy Director for the ACLU of Connecticut, we had a rousing discussion about the decision.  And special thanks to John for plugging my soon-to-be-released CD, The Lawyer Is A Tramp Champ!

Click here to watch video of our discussion (courtesy of CT-N), or here for the audio track.

“The Lawyer Is A Champ” Is Almost Here!

It is hard to believe that 11 years have passed since I released “The Billable Hour Blues,” my first CD of musical parodies about the trials and tribulations of the practice of law.  (Many thanks to my friend Vince Valvo, former publisher of the Connecticut Law Tribune, who produced the CD.)  Now, after a decade of further effort, I’m about to release my follow-up CD, “The Lawyer Is A Tramp Champ“–14 new songs that poke fun at the law and help us lawyers remember not to take ourselves too seriously.  The CD will be released next month and 100% of the proceeds of the first 30 days of sales [through December 31, 2015] will go to legal aid organizations in Connecticut, all worthy causes.  Keep you eyes (and ears) open for the announcement of the official release date.  And thanks in advance for listening!

Judges, Dictionaries, And The Meaning Of Statutes

Arrgggghhhh.   If I read one more judicial opinion in which a judge or panel of appellate judges resolves a dispute over the interpretation of a statute by resort to a dictionary. . . .  As Justice Robert Jackson wrote, dictionaries “are the last resort of the baffled judge.”  Jordon v. DeGeorge, 341 U.S. 223, 234 (Jackson, J. dissenting).

It is unfortunate that judges turns to dictionaries for comfort in hard cases.  An interesting article, “The Dictionary Is Not A Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning,” explains why such comfort is poorly placed.