Define the term 'terrorist'

[Devils Advocate]

The State of Georgia surely has a broad definition.

Source

Quote:The state of Georgia claims an open records activist broke copyright law — and maybe even committed a terrorist act — by posting the full, annotated versions of the state’s legal code online.

State officials claim in a lawsuit filed last week that Carl Malamud had engaged in an 18-year “crusade to control the accessibility of U.S. government documents” by scanning and reposting the annotated version of the Georgia legal code, which courts often rely on to make decisions on the law, on his website Public.Resource.org.


The state also “points directly to the annotated version as the official laws of the state,” reported Techdirt.

The basic legal code is readily available for free online and in print, but the state claims in its suit that information in the annotated legal code is copyrighted.

The annotated legal code is currently available for $378 through legal publisher Lexis Nexis or through a complicated series of steps through the Georgia General Assembly website.

Malamud argues that public laws should not be subject to any form of copyright protection — and he says the courts have generally upheld that view.

The lawsuit cites a remark made by Malamud in 2009 describing his efforts to post government documents online as “standards terrorism” to accuse the digital activist of committing acts of terrorism.

“Consistent with its strategy of terrorism, (Malamud) freely admits to the copying and distribution of massive numbers of Plaintiff’s Copyrighted Annotations,” the lawsuit claims.

The state, which complains in the suit about Malamud’s online donation campaigns to fund his operations, argues that it cannot maintain online records on its annotated legal code without charging residents to access the documents.

Oregon had previously threatened to sue Malamud for copyright violation but has since backed down.

[GMDino]

(07-28-2015, 03:08 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: The State of Georgia surely has a broad definition.

Source

How do I define terrorism?

Not what this guy did.

[Devils Advocate]

(07-28-2015, 03:10 PM)GMDino Wrote: How do I define terrorism?

Not what this guy did.

I know right?

Unless he's using copyrighted material from Lexus Nexus, I can't see how public law could be copyrighted ... I can't see how annotations are considered protected material. 

This to me, Speaks volumes as to why even some form of basic law isn't taught in public schools. They simply don't want you to know. 

[fredtoast]

(07-28-2015, 03:16 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: I know right?

Unless he's using copyrighted material from Lexus Nexus, I can't see how public law could be copyrighted ... I can't see how annotations are considered protected material. 

Annotations include case laws research that is listed at the end of the code section.  It takes legal research to come up with these cases, and they have to be constantly updated as the case law changes. So I could see how they could be copyright protected.

But the code itself can not be copyright protected.  It is all public information, and it never changes unless the legislature changes it.

But either way this is not terrorism.

[Benton]

(07-28-2015, 03:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Annotations include case laws research that is listed at the end of the code section.  It takes legal research to come up with these cases, and they have to be constantly updated as the case law changes.  So I could see how they could be copyright protected.

But the code itself can not be copyright protected.  It is all public information, and it never changes unless the legislature changes it.

But either way this is not terrorism.

That was my first thought. I could see copyright violation, but terrorism is a stretch.

[Devils Advocate]

(07-28-2015, 03:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Annotations include case laws research that is listed at the end of the code section.  It takes legal research to come up with these cases, and they have to be constantly updated as the case law changes.  So I could see how they could be copyright protected.

But the code itself can not be copyright protected.  It is all public information, and it never changes unless the legislature changes it.

But either way this is not terrorism.

But isn't that how rulings are found .... through annotations?

[fredtoast]

(07-28-2015, 03:36 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: But isn't that how rulings are found .... through annotations?

No.  Only a very small portion of the case law is included in annotations.

Plus if you have an annotated version of the code it could be outdated within a year unless you subscribe to the annual updates.

[Devils Advocate]

(07-28-2015, 03:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  Only a very small portion of the case law is included in annotations.

Plus if you have an annotated version of the code it could be outdated within a year unless you subscribe to the annual updates.

Good to know. I coulda swore I just read that it was. But you're in the know, so I'll take you're word for. But tell me then, why are they important and so expensive?

I agree, obviously that it's not terrorism. But Georgia is gonna explore that possibility, it would appear.

[Devils Advocate]

The issue here, it could be, is if the subcontracting party accepted state money to print/log the annotations. If they did, wouldn't that by default make them public property... since the public paid for it?

Also, and I don't mean to harp on this as I've already conceded to Fred, on his word, that annotations aren't used in deciding or administering law. But in fact aren't they Fred? Stare Decisis? Aren't they administered in over ruling/ sustaining points of argument and other nuances?

[*Nately120*]

A terrorist is a right-wing nut with brownish skin, not to be confused with a right-wing nut with white skin, aka a "patriot."

[*jason*]

A terrorist attacks civilians as opposed to military targets... 

[6andcounting]

This

[GMDino]

(07-28-2015, 10:30 PM)6andcounting Wrote: This

[Rotobeast]

(07-28-2015, 05:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: A terrorist is a right-wing nut with brownish skin, not to be confused with a right-wing nut with white skin, aka a "patriot."

[*michaelsean*]

And Obama looks the other way. How many more guys like this are hiding out in this country?