Highlights From Today's Reply Brief (Part 4)
Regarding our argument that plaintiffs refuse to explain why literary works that are scientific or academic will not receive any compensation:
The plaintiffs misconstrue the issue that Muchnick has raised about the term "literary." The question raised is how do they justify a notice, and related claim form, which advises class members they cannot be compensated for "scientific studies," or "articles in scientific or academic journals"? Those types of works are covered by the Copyright Act's definition of literary works. There is no other specific definition in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement doesn't say anything about excluding those kinds of works. What is the source of the exclusion, and how can it possibly be justified as some kind of carve-out of the alleged class? The opposition ignores this question.
The full brief can be viewed at http://freelancerights.muchnick.net. Comments can be posted here or emailed to me at info@muchnick.net.
The plaintiffs misconstrue the issue that Muchnick has raised about the term "literary." The question raised is how do they justify a notice, and related claim form, which advises class members they cannot be compensated for "scientific studies," or "articles in scientific or academic journals"? Those types of works are covered by the Copyright Act's definition of literary works. There is no other specific definition in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement doesn't say anything about excluding those kinds of works. What is the source of the exclusion, and how can it possibly be justified as some kind of carve-out of the alleged class? The opposition ignores this question.
The full brief can be viewed at http://freelancerights.muchnick.net. Comments can be posted here or emailed to me at info@muchnick.net.
posted by Irv Muchnick at 1:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home