On 2/10/2010 3:29 PM, RJack wrote:
1) The link:
<http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2009/04/settlement-disagreement-leads-to.html>
isn't my link
<http://www.digitalmedialawyerblog.com/2009/09/good_copyright_registration_hy_1.html>
But they are discussing the same case.
2) Did you notice the future tense in your cite, "... when the
Supreme Court does reverse" ?
Yes. That refers to "The Second Circuit doesn’t allow the kind of
general prophylactic injunction that other circuits do." It does not
refer to "SG’s remedy for other infringements is to register the
other versions."
3) The NEW YORK TIMES CO. V. TASINI, 533 U.S. 483 (2001) decision
concerned *distribution* of established collective works -- not
registration of ongoing derivative works.
Again, that does not refer to "SG’s remedy for other infringements is
to register the other versions."
So please explain Hyman, WTF are talking about?
As my cite states, the court found that SG was entitled to an
injunction against copyright infringement for those versions of its
work that it had registered. If it wanted injunctions for
infringement against the other versions, it could get those by first
registering those versions and then filing a claim.