SimpleG Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/04/supreme-court-rules-georgia-cant-put-the-law-behind-a-paywall/?comments=1 TLDR Georgia allowed the annotations that make laws easier to understand to be copyrighted because they didn't want to have to deal with it. So if you want the to see the annotations you had to pay. Public.Resource.Org published the full thing was sued by the state and lost,Court of Appeals over ruled in favor of Public Resources but PR took it to the Supreme Court to make an example. It only narrowly passed in their favor. Whats really interesting is separation of Justices on this one Sotomayor,Roberts, Kavanaugh, , Kagan ,Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, Ginsburg and Breyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CayceG Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 WTF at that split. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 17 minutes ago, CayceG said: WTF at that split. Everyone over 65 ruled in favour of copyrighting the annotations (and thus the paywall), everyone under 65 ruled against it. Not sure how much of an effect that had, but it's an interesting split. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spork3245 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 20 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Everyone over 65 ruled in favour of copyrighting the annotations (and thus the paywall), everyone under 65 ruled against it. Not sure how much of an effect that had, but it's an interesting split. Fucking commies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Can't claim "ignorance of the law is no excuse" if you can't get free copies of the law, or free copies of the explanation of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwinIon Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 I'm glad that they ruled pretty broadly, applying the standard to any document produced by the state legislature, and not a much more narrow ruling. The most bizarre part of this whole thing to me is that they didn't publish a free version regardless of annotations. I'm not sure how anyone could think that it's ok to pass laws and not make them freely available. If the issue was simply that they had annotated versions available that were behind a paywall, I'd still think they should be free, but it wouldn't be quite as big a deal. Not having a free version at all is just nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 55 minutes ago, TwinIon said: The most bizarre part of this whole thing to me is that they didn't publish a free version regardless of annotations. There was a free version, but it didn't have the annotations, and Georgia was saying that the free version was not the official version of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.