except, reading one paragraph into the article, this is not about charging the public to read the law, but to read PRIVATELY CREATED ANNOTATIONS of the law so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯https://twitter.com/radleybalko/status/1201614783935586304 …
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP
They're not exactly privately created annotations. The annotations were created by the state, not by a private entity, which is why the state claims copyright (the work was performed by private parties under contract to the state). This is the crux of the case.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
-
Replying to @MorlockP
https://ia800809.us.archive.org/10/items/gov.uscourts.gand.218354/gov.uscourts.gand.218354.1.0.pdf … Page 2 Item 2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @random_eddie
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ok, this is more complicated than the derp level team A take and more complicated than the half-derp level team B take sigh
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP
In all the years I've been watching this case, I've seen maybe two or three people correctly analyze it. Balko and TechDirt have not been among them. Random commenters uniformly have absolutely no idea what the facts of this case really are, because journos suck.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.