Feeds

back to article US lawyer's email not creative enough for copyright protection

A lawyer's email was not creative enough to be protected by copyright laws, a US court has ruled. The critical email had been forwarded outside of an email group without the consent of author Kenneth Stern, who then sued the person who forwarded the message for breach of copyright. Stern's email lacked originality and a …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Gold badge
Troll

Common sense ruling...

...now punish him for bringing the law and lawyers in general into disrepute.

Hey, if we hanged all the lawyers that did that, the world would be a far better place for everybody (including all reasonable lawyers).

8
0
Silver badge

@BristolBachelor: Well, you might be able to get him on the first count,

but the second one is never going to fly. Lawyers in the US are already in so much disrepute it isn't possible to bring any more upon them.

Which means that if you bring suite on both counts, another good lawyer will probably get him off on the first count as well.

0
0
Thumb Up

Ah Ah Ah...

Or When Dubious Lawsuits Go Bad :)

4
0

Quite right too!

© Anonymous John 2011

0
0

Eedjit

At least SOME Judges in the US recognise when a case has absolutely zero merit. In the UK you could be charged with the offence of being a Vexatious Litigant... in extreme cases, and barred from bringing any action in Court again.

4
0
Thumb Up

Love it

"The judge ... asked for more details of the fees incurred by the Weinsteins before settling on the figure for which Stern will be liable."

If that was me, I'd put in costs for kleenex for wiping away the tears of laughter, administrative costs of reading Stern's communications, wear and tear caused on pens used for replying and wear caused on phones used to call him and all sorts of other random junk. When Dubious Lawsuits Go Bad And Deservedly Bankrupt The Idiot.

0
0
Silver badge
Go

One Question...

... How could a situation like this be responsible for "aggravating athritis in his hip"?

Good work that judge for showing some common sense!!!

1
0
Anonymous Coward

I'm confused.

I agree with the judgement in a litigation case in the USA. Something is wrong with the world.

3
0

Do this qualify for The Streisand Effect?

Ken - meet Barbie :-)

0
0
WTF?

Copyright certificate?

I thought the US subscribed to the Berne Convention, meaning that the copyright exists as the work is created, without any registration or other forms of government intervention.

Why would that guy have requested a copyright certificate? Why does the US government even issue copyright certificate as they are - re the Berne convention - without value.

1
0
Silver badge

We do use the Berne Convention,

but if you register the copyright with the US Office, it removes certain burdens of proof required under the convention. Therefore most lawyers will tell you to make sure you have the certificate on file before filing the case.

0
0
Bronze badge

US Copyright Registration

It also allows for additional damages, I suppose on the principle that you can't argue that you didn't know it had been copyrighted.

There's a couple of quirks of US Copyright Law-- "fair use" is an important one--but every country has a few quirks. The Berne Convention is a minimum.

On this particular legal point, if the lawyer had written his comment as a limerick, he would have been OK.

0
0
Vic
Silver badge

"Their dubiousness aside"

That's Judge-speak for "you lying twat".

Well done, that man :-)

Vic.

1
0

OR

Well done that woman - on the rather bold assumption that Dolly is not a usual name for a man.

0
0
FAIL

copyright troll

Back under your bridge.

1
0
This topic is closed for new posts.