In the first place, it was unusual for an interlocutory appeal to be granted from the denial of the preliminary injunction motion. In federal court usually you can only appeal from a final judgment.
Similarly, apart from the fact that it's always rare for a certiorari petition to be granted, it's especially tough where the appeal is not from a final judgment, but just from a preliminary injunction denial which does not dispose of the whole case.
while the summary is laudatory, fawning, even, it is not central to the decision
Funny, I had the same reaction when I read it. He seemed like a salesman for Google or something.
I would like to retain your services in this matter. Please list your bank account information so that I may transfer a retainer payment to you. Thank you. Sincerely, Prince Bernard Koffi Austine Nigeria
Dear Prince Bernard,
If you're talking about my bank account, you're barking up the wrong tree
So, if this stands does this mean it's lawful for Google to make the full text available of these books, or not?
Fair use cases are very fact specific. If you start monkeying with the facts, Judge Chin might not feel the same way about it.
If google can legally copy books (even when profit is involved) then why can't I do the same?
Wouldn't I get hammered with copyright infringement problems if I scanned in books I did not author myself?
I don't know but please hire me as your lawyer when you do.
What a horrible example of how not to behave as a decent human being.
Agreed. Abelson should be ashamed of himself.
Other than to demonstrate how low some people can go.
You're one of my 3 favorite lawyers, the other two being the lady who handled my divorce and the man who handled my bankruptcy.
Great that you found good people to handle those important things.
Maybe to you 4channers it is, troll, but NYCL is well known and greatly respected here at slashdot. So go back to reddit and leave us grownups alone.
Hey buddy, you watch your mouth when you're talking about NYCL!
All riggghhhhtttt. Thanks Amicus