(entry last updated: 2003-06-02 21:39:58)
Slashdot has an ironic report: Using Palladium to Secure P2P Networks
Salon report: 20th Century Fox loses Supreme Court copyright case
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a video company cannot be sued under a trademark law for reusing old war documentary footage without giving credit to 20th Century Fox.
The 8-0 decision gives some freedom to people who want to reproduce works that no longer have copyright protection.
Justice Antonin Scalia said that the trademark law, which is intended to protect consumers from confusion, does not allow creators to claim plagiarism when their uncopyrighted works and inventions are used.
Here’s something to think about: Internet Battle Raises Questions About the First Amendment [pdf]
The order, entered by Judge Diana Lewis of Circuit Court in West Palm Beach, forbids Mr. Max to write about Ms. Johnson. It has alarmed experts in First Amendment law, who say that such orders prohibiting future publication, prior restraints, are essentially unknown in American law. Moreover, they say, claims like Ms. Johnson’s, for invasion of privacy, have almost never been considered enough to justify prior restraints.
Ms. Johnson’s lawsuit also highlights some shifting legal distinctions in the Internet era, between private matters and public ones and between speech and property.
Judge Lewis ruled on May 6, before Mr. Max was notified of the suit and without holding a hearing. She told Mr. Max that he could not use “Katy” on his site. Nor could he use Ms. Johnson’s last name, full name or the words “Miss Vermont.”
The judge also prohibited Mr. Max from “disclosing any stories, facts or information, notwithstanding its truth, about any intimate or sexual acts engaged in by” Ms. Johnson. That prohibition is not limited to his Web site. Finally, Judge Lewis ordered Mr. Max to sever the virtual remains of his relationship with Ms. Johnson. He is no longer allowed to link to her Web site.
Slashdot discussion: Barbra Streisand, Miss Vermont, And Your Website