tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post1078351596074529843..comments2023-12-18T10:15:52.664-06:00Comments on Gillette-Torvik Blog: The copyright of law and misuse of terrorism analogiesBart Torvikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13661031240106200076noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post-77559248380669857022015-07-24T16:06:55.765-05:002015-07-24T16:06:55.765-05:001) Terrorism is an infamously tricky concept to de...1) Terrorism is an infamously tricky concept to define with rigor. Safe to say this is not it, though. Basically, Malamud used the word himself to describe his own tactics -- and I think what he meant is that he is fighting a guerilla war: small band of lightly armed individuals poking at giant state powers. So the lawyers representing Georgia decided that this was some sort of "admission" that he's practicing "terrorism." In other words: terrible lawyering worthy of our derision.<br /><br />2) I agree it seems weird. I guess if the state of Georgia is suing to try to prevent their precious annotations from being perused by citizens of Alabama, maybe that makes some sense. (sarcasm)Bart Torvikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13661031240106200076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post-13311856237503400072015-07-24T13:59:37.538-05:002015-07-24T13:59:37.538-05:00Your post raises two questions:
1. What is the de...Your post raises two questions:<br />1. What is the definition of terrorism as used in the Complaint and who came up with definition? The exhibit mentioned in the complaint isn't attached.<br />2. Who is "the public" that paid for the summaries? I assume that means the citizens of the State of Georgia. It seems weird that the citizens of the state would have to pay to see something that their taxes already bought. I wonder if charging non-citizens of Georgia would run afoul of the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution. Adam Gillettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14498496568932193475noreply@blogger.com