4 ms·
The dissenting judges would tell you that the laws are not copyright, the annotations are, which, although important to understanding the law, are not the law.
by CobrastanJorji 7y ago
The dissenting judges would tell you that the laws are not copyright, the annotations are, which, although important to understanding the law, are not the law.
- simcop2387 7y agoBut while they aren't the law, they hold the power of law as the annotations are used by judges to decide cases.
- wahern 7y agoAs the majority opinion and one dissenting opinion explain, whether a work has the force of law is not the test. If it were, dissenting judicial opinions would be copyrightable, but they're not. The rule is that works produced by judges or legislators acting in their official capacities are not copyrightable. In this case, the annotations were works-for-hire of the legislature; whether they have the force of law is irrelevant.