[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Promissory Estoppel

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Promissory Estoppel
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:30:42 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
An example that promissory estoppel is a theme for cranks and crazies:

<> The real plaintiff is probably Philip J. Berg, a lawyer who lives in Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, and who has pursued his crusade elsewhere, see Berg v. Obama, 574 F. Supp. 2d 509 (E.D. Pa. 2008), invoking the civil rights statutes, the Federal Election Campaign Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Immigration and
 Nationality Act, and the law of promissory estoppel.

Ah. . . reliance upon actual court decisions. This is a good thing.

An example that copyright infringement litigation is a theme for
cranks and crazies:

"It provides that “no action for infringement of the copyright in
any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or
registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with
this title.” 17 U.S.C. §411(a); see also 17 U.S.C. § 501.

Whether this requirement is jurisdictional is not up for debate in
this Circuit. On two recent occasions, we have squarely held that it
is. See Well-Made Toy Mfg. Corp. v. Goffa Int’l Corp., 354 F.3d 112,
114, 115 (2d Cir. 2003) (affirming dismissal for lack of “subject
matter jurisdiction” because section 411(a)’s “registration
requirement is jurisdictional”); Morris v. Business Concepts, Inc.,
259 F.3d 65, 72, 73 (2d Cir. 2001) (holding “that subject matter
jurisdiction was lacking because the registration requirement of
section 411(a) was not satisfied” and affirming dismissal “for lack
of subject matter jurisdiction”)."

There are cranks and crazies who have filed copyright litigation in
the Second Circuit five or more times in the past year without any
registered copyrights -- now that's *crazy*.

He. He.

Rjack :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]