Supreme Court Versus Georgia

[Crawtator]

As far as i'm concerned, the deal breaker on Georgia's approach is:

"You can get an unofficial version of state law for free from LexisNexis' website, but LexisNexis' terms of service explicitly warned users that it might be inaccurate."

A free version should be accurate and official (whether with/without annotations). Don't palm the citizens off with unofficial/inaccurate freeware.

Um...did you actually look at the website I linked and follow the links? Because it actually reads:

"OFFICIAL CODE OF GEORGIA ANNOTATED
Copyright 2020 by The State of Georgia All rights reserved."

at the end of every codal provision. That seems like the state is endorsing that it is official. Take one entry for example:

https://advance.lexis.com/documentp...kkk&prid=d8051935-7ab8-46b8-a6f3-98b1f6a83256

That is the law for statutory rape in Georgia, available for free to all, provided by L-N through contract services with the state. There are no annotations provided, which I suspect very strongly would be provided to L-N clients or on a pay-as-you-go basis.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The. Georgia should employ eminent domain and purchase the annotations from LN

Why they paid for them in work for hire already(see OP) why should Georgia have to pay for them twice?

 

[fishbob]

I'm not sure that follows.

A publisher can contract with an author to write a book. Pay an advance, require a promotional tour, specify a certain minimum length, etc. But even though the publisher contracted the book and paid the author to write it, the author still holds the copyright, unless there is a written agreement by which the author assigns the copyright to another person or entity.

Was there such an agreement in this case? Apparently not, or it probably wouldn't have gone to the Supreme Court. Apparently the state of Georgia made no such agreement, but now wants to behave as if they had.

A government entity is different.
In your analogy, the publisher is the citizenry, the state is the author.
But the state represents the citizenry, in essence speaks for the citizenry, and is therefore an arm of the citizenry. In your analogy, the state has contracted itself with its own money to work for itself.

You can't charge yourself for working for yourself to do your own work so you can sell it to yourself. Well you can, but shouldn't because that is some really stupid accounting BS that will not stand up to the tax auditors.

 

[fishbob]

Part of the problem is that the material in question isn't actually laws, rules, or regulations.

If I sit down and write a four-volume set of notes, expressing my understanding of Georgia law, its interpretation and application, my work does not become public domain just because I'm writing about laws that are in the public domain. The right to copy my work remains mine and mine alone. If the state or the citizens of Georgia want to copy it, they must acknowledge my copyright and deal with me.

And this applies even if they contract me to write the work in the first place. Unless the contract provides for a transfer of copyright, the right to copy remains with me.

If you do that on the state payroll, the work is not yours. If contracted and through some oversight in contracting language, the state forgot to mention that the results of your research belongs to the state, the courts will most likely tell you to take a hike. You have already been paid for your work.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If you do that on the state payroll, the work is not yours. If contracted and through some oversight in contracting language, the state forgot to mention that the results of your research belongs to the state, the courts will most likely tell you to take a hike. You have already been paid for your work.

You are breaking a fundamental conservative commandment "thou shall never prevent double billing"

 

[acbytesla]

Part of the problem is that the material in question isn't actually laws, rules, or regulations.

If I sit down and write a four-volume set of notes, expressing my understanding of Georgia law, its interpretation and application, my work does not become public domain just because I'm writing about laws that are in the public domain. The right to copy my work remains mine and mine alone. If the state or the citizens of Georgia want to copy it, they must acknowledge my copyright and deal with me.

And this applies even if they contract me to write the work in the first place. Unless the contract provides for a transfer of copyright, the right to copy remains with me.

Except the comments/notes etc were made by government officials and may have an affect on how those laws and regulations are enforced.