- One note about the Google Book Search settlement, beyond my imprecation yesterday to actually make a decision, guys: Nobody is really talking about the elephant in the room. I won't analyze it in public before the opt-out deadline Friday... except by pointing at it. Note that said elephant creates an inherent, unresolvable conflict between the Author Sub-Class and the Publisher Sub-Class.
- Professor Arend notes a colleague's thoughtful missive on the American experience in investigating misconduct in intelligence operations. <SARCASM> This is, of course, counterfactual as to Dick's hurt feelings. I beseech thee, Lord Cheney, to consider that thou might'st be wrong (for the first time in thy life.) </SARCASM>
- Will Tony Stark try to take Cinderella on a date (perhaps going seven for seven with Disney princesses?) now that Disney is absorbing Marvel? Or, perhaps, will the history of shoddy recordkeeping at Marvel — not to mention an intervening bankruptcy, let alone the dubious constitutionality of work-for-hire ownership of characters as practiced in the comic segment of the publishing industry, particularly under the 1976 Act — mean that the real winners here will be the lawyers?
- My sharkly sense of humor appreciates this judge who is dealing with another kind of frivolous lawsuit the best way possible. Maybe he's just worried about who might be getting stimulus benefits... although I'm not sure how to tell the difference.
|
Law and reality in publishing and entertainment (seldom the same thing) from the creator's side of the slush pile, with occasional forays into politics, military affairs, censorship and the First Amendment, legal theory, and anything else that strikes me as interesting. |
|---|