It is a silly ruling. It does not have anything to do with copyrights. That lawyer was not barred from typing the whole thing up for himself. Let him do the work. What he was asked to pay for was the work that somebody else did. Who here does that many hours of free work for an attorney who charged his client $250 an hour just to read the transcript? [sound of crickets]
So what the judge "should" have been ruling on is whether people are entitled to be paid for the hours spent for doing a job, which I thought was already established law.
Just plain silly.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Derigitable.
Re: Re: Re: Court Reporter Salaries and Fees
So what the judge "should" have been ruling on is whether people are entitled to be paid for the hours spent for doing a job, which I thought was already established law.
Just plain silly.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Derigitable.
Submit a story now.