Copyright Suit Against Google Ripped Off Another Suit's Wording
from the second-level-copying dept
The latest in a long string of copyright suits against Google came yesterday when Grateful Dead mandolin player David Grisman
claimed damages from certain clips of him performing that appeared on YouTube. Apart from the irony of a Grateful Dead member complaining about fans sharing his clips, it seems that the language in the initial complaint was
lifted word for word from another suit against Google on a similar subject. The firm that wrote the initial complaint is not amused, although these things aren't copyrighted, so there doesn't appear to be any legal problem here. As law professor Stephen Bainbridge points out,
the real issue here is ethics. Lawyers typically charge their clients by the hour, but if they're just cutting and pasting, then they're probably not putting in as many hours as they claim. Of course, if basic tasks can be done by cut and paste, it would seem to undermine the need for
such high barriers to entry into the legal profession.
Update: As a number of commenters have pointed out, David Grisman may have played music with the Grateful Dead, but was not actually a full-fledged member of the band.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
not a Grateful Dead member
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Copyright
the work is under copyright from the moment
of creation. You can take further steps to help
secure your rights but that's not necessary.
It's unlikely but lawyers feeding on lawyers
would be fun to watch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: not a Grateful Dead member
The real irony is that the Dead approved of and supported the recording and free distribution of their concerts and even set up recording areas for those who wanted to at each concert.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wtf?
I've always understood that The Dead don't give a rat's ass if people post/trade/whatever recordings of live performances - so long as they aren't sold.
So, basically, we've got one dick who did some stuff with them and he's... what? What in the hell does he hope to get out of this?
You're a friggin' nobody. Be happy people are listening to your music.
The "I haven't really done anything with my life, but... maybe... if I sue the right company... I'll get rich!!!" style of thinking is disgusting.
JESUS!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copyright
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: not a Grateful Dead member
To your point, there were taper sections at the Garcia/Grisman shows, so I agree it is ironic.
I just wish Techdirt was at least as accurate as the articles it cited.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I think the issue here was in regards to the "Word for word"
complaint....someone always has to bitch....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: wtf?
lol.. that's one of the funniest comments from an actual nobody that i've heard all day.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: not a Grateful Dead member
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Defence of lawyers
1. law works on precedents and lawyers copy what has worked in the past.
2. the skill a lawyer brings to the job consists of knowing what to copy.
Of course, if the lawyer is charging for time not actually spent then that's just plain old go to jail fraud.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How Ironic
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"...the real issue here is ethics..."
[ link to this | view in thread ]