Case: 18-1150 Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc.(2019-Dec-02)

QUESTION PRESENTED: This Court has held, as a matter of "public policy," that judicial opinions are not copyrightable. Banks v. Manchester, 128 U.S. 244, 253-254 (1888). Lower courts have extended that holding to state statutes. See, e.g., John G. Danielson, Inc. v. Winchester-Conant Props., Inc., 322 F.3d 26, 38 (1st Cir. 2003). But the rule that "government edicts” cannot be copyrighted has "proven difficult to apply when the material in question does not fall neatly into the categories of statutes or judicial opinions." Ibid. The question presented is: Whether the government edicts doctrine extends to-and thus renders uncopyrightable-works that lack the force of law, such as the annotations in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/scotus/support

QUESTION PRESENTED:

This Court has held, as a matter of "public policy," that judicial opinions are not copyrightable. Banks v. Manchester, 128 U.S. 244, 253-254 (1888). Lower courts have extended that holding to state statutes. See, e.g., John G. Danielson, Inc. v. Winchester-Conant Props., Inc., 322 F.3d 26, 38 (1st Cir. 2003). But the rule that "government edicts” cannot be copyrighted has "proven difficult to apply when the material in question does not fall neatly into the categories of statutes or judicial opinions." Ibid.

The question presented is:

  1. Whether the government edicts doctrine extends to-and thus renders uncopyrightable-works that lack the force of law, such as the annotations in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated.
--- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/scotus/support

★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Case: 18-1150 Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc.(2019-Dec-02)
Broadcast by