In other news, the Eleventh Circuit has apparently decided that a "revision" means "whatever the publisher decides, as long as it doesn't mix stuff with another publisher." In a 7–5 en banc decision, that court has just decided that the National Geographic CD-ROM set is a mere "revision" of the print magazine, and that therefore photographers who contributed works to the original magazine on a freelance basis have no rights under Tasini. I'm not happy with this decision — I think it wrong for a variety of fundamental reasons that the Supreme Court simply did not reach in Tasini, and resulted in some unfortunate rhetoric in Tasini — but it is at least defensible, unlike the Second Circuit's previous "reversal" in a parallel matter. However, I think this case is also ripe for certiorari, despite the apparent absence of a circuit split, if only because it points at a true lacuna in Tasini itself.