Recreational reading

Shortly after we started this blog we did some posts about Neil Gaiman.  Mr. Gaiman just put out a collection of 12 very short stories called A Calendar of Tales.  You can download/read it here.  I read the January story this morning.  It was pretty good. 

On Wisconsin

In case you thought that the Wisconsin Supreme Court is functioning better, Justice Bradley issued this order to let you know you are wrong.  Our previous coverage of the Wisconsin Supremes is here.    It is an interesting summary of events regarding Justice Bradley and Justice Prosser. 

Are briefs protected by copyright? UPDATE

UPDATE:

Answer: no.

After previously dismissing the claims on behalf of lawyers who never registered their briefs with the Copyright office, Judge Jed Rakoff has now granted West and Lexis's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case in its entirety. What is my incentive for even creating new briefs, now?

ORIGINAL POST (2/23/2012):

Eugene Volokh notes that a lawsuit has been filed in federal court alleging that Westlaw and Lexis violate copyright law by posting (and then charging for) briefs filed in court. Professor Volokh thinks it's not an unreasonable argument.

I don't have any opinions on the merits of the case, but if briefs are protectable by copyright, then I may have a claim. Compare this brief that I drafted (with help, of course) with this brief that others filed in another case. For example, compare pages 21 - 25 of my brief with pages 15 - 18 of the other brief. It's pretty much a straight lift.

If you actually read the briefs, you'll notice that my client and the other guy's client were fighting the same battle. And we both "emerged" victorious, smashing our Kirkland & Ellis-represented opponent on summary judgment, and embarrassing them (in a joint opinion) at the Federal Circuit. I was aware of the other brief soon after it was filed, and I took it as an homage.

But I'm willing to check the statute of limitations on copyright infringement claims ...

Evidence suggests that slapping children does not quiet them down.

On occasion we are led to believe that there was a time when flying was a glamorous way to travel.  While I am not sure that time ever existed, if it did that time is gone.  Exhibit A in support of the fact that flying has gone from glamorous to brutal might be the case of Joe Rickey Hundley.

A few things Justice Scalia and I have in common

1.  We are both humans alive in the United States in the 21st Century;
2.  We are both inolved in the legal business;
3.  Our first names begin with A;
4.  Our last names end in a vowel;
5.  We belong to the same religion; and
6.  If the ABA Law Journal is correct, neither of us watched President Obama's State of the Union Address.  We differed on the reasons for not watching. I wanted to do a little reading and he thinks the address is a "childish spectacle."  As for not actually attending the speech, Justice Scalia also did not want to "lend dignity" to it by attending.  I did not go because my invitation-I assume-was lost in the mail. 

The Hard Work and Home Life of Me, Your Average Lawyer

There's a provocative post over at Lawyerist entitled, "Being a Lawyer Doesn't Mean Long Hours." The author, Chris Bradley quotes someone quoting Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's COO, saying she goes home at 5:30 p.m. every day, and asks why lawyers can't do the same. The commenters mostly take Mr. Bradley to task for even suggesting such a thing, and I agree with them.

Here's my take. People talk about "work-life balance," but I find the best course is just to maximize everything. The most important thing to me, by far, is my family. Except for my clients, to whom I devote every waking moment. Of course, during the in between moments I must admit that all I care about is myself. And money. I contain multitudes, after all.

A day in my life is just the average day, I believe, in a lawyer's life. I awake before dawn to train with the ghost of Bruce Lee for four hours. I then pen letters to my children and tuck 'em underneath their pillows. Just as everyone gets up to eat the breakfast I've cooked for them, I head to the office. Today, for example, I checked in and started and finished the supreme court brief that was due today. Then it was off to the courthouse for a two-week trial (which I finished in one day). Over lunch I taught a six-hour CLE (three ethics credits). The afternoon was filled with client meetings. I had four clients scheduled for 2 pm, six clients scheduled for 3 pm, etc., all the way until 8 pm. After these meetings, I headed home at 5:00 pm, picked up the kids from daycare, and cooked dinner in time to have it waiting for my wife when she got home from work. After that I bathed the kids while leading seven conference calls with various clients simultaneously. I then read the Lord of the Rings trilogy (including the poems and songs) to the kids and put them down for the night. Next I made sweet love to my wife for three hours (cut it a little short because tomorrow is Valentine's Day, after all). After my wife fell asleep, it was off to my other family's house. I arrived there about 5:30 pm and was also able to cook dinner for them. Baths, all seven Harry Potter books, more sweet love.

Then I surfed the Internet for about 11 hours, daydreamed about the Badgers' recent win over Michigan, and had just a little time to do some blogging.

Nothing special, I admit—just making it work, like all lawyers do.

No pay in his game either.

Continuing our coverage of Michigan circuit judge Wayne McCree (see here, here, and here) we report, thanks to this United Press International story, that Judge McCree has been suspended without pay over the allegation that he allegedly impregnated a woman who appeared before him as part of a custody dispute.  We covered that story back in December.

WAL-ZYR and ZYRTEC: Confusing?

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board recently found that Walgreens' trademark WAL-ZYR, used for its generic version of Zyrtec (the allergy medication), is likely to be confused with the ZYRTEC mark by consumers in the marketplace. The TTAB therefore sustained an opposition to Walgreens' attempt to register WAL-ZYR.

This is a curious decision in that there's frankly no real likelihood than any real consumer would actually be confused by Walgreens' use of the WAL-ZYR mark. Anyone who has ever perused the aisles at a pharmacy knows that there are brand name medications, and there are generics. The generics are usually named something similar to the brand name medication, so you can easily identify them. At Walgreens, for instance, most of the store-brand generics start with "WAL-" and end with an homage to the brand name equivalent: Wal-Dryl (Benedryl), Wal-Zan (Zantac), Wal-Tussin (Robitussin), Wal-Sporin (Neosporin), Wal-Phed (Sudafed), Wal-Mucil (Metamucil), etc... These marks are not confusing. They are the opposite of confusing: they are illuminating.

I suspect Walgreens will appeal this decision to federal court, and I expect they will prevail.

H/t: TTABlog

One does not need to know anything in order to be a pundit.

Someone named Amanda Marcotte wrote a blog post at Slate saying:  (1) we should not care about whom the College of Cardinals chooses at a papal conclave to be the next Pope; and (2) the next pope will continue the "war" on women and gay people. I am pretty sure that war is used in the figurative sense as I feel like we would have heard about a literal war on women and gay people before now.

An alternative approach to wills.

Like Ray Fulk, I liked of the short-lived TV series Lucan.  Unlike Mr. Fulk, I have not made the star of the show a beneficiary to my will.  The Springfield, Illinois State Journal Register has this very odd story.

The story leaves the reader with the question of whether it is stranger to live on a farm that did not have running water in the 21st century or leave one's estate to the benefit of two actors one has never met.  What TV show stars are going to be in your will Mr. Torvik?