5 ms·

The questioning seems to imply there's a split among party lines. Is that a coincidence or is there some political aspect to this?

by jayd16 6y ago

tharne 6y ago
The American right in it's current form tends to treat everything as property and is very supportive of defending all things copyright related. A lot of this has to do with the waning influence of libertarian thought on the American right and it's drift towards a more corporatist philosophy. The American left is better in this respect, but has likewise become more corporatist in it's outlook over time.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> The questioning seems to imply there's a split among party lines. Is that a coincidence or is there some political aspect to this? A little bit of both; the right is more inclined to strong, especially commercial, property rights even for things like copyright that are expressly, both Constitutionally and statutorily, bounded and contingent, while the left is (from a judicial perspective) generally more supportive of public interest limitations in general and fair use, which while statutorily enshrined was judicially created based on the First Amendment before being written into statute, in particular. That said, its far from a perfect mapping and you'll often see splits that don't follow party lines in copyright, and the late Justice Ginsberg, while one of the more liberal justices on the court, was known to favor strong copyright. in general, outside of perennial hotbutton issues that are permanently both highly politically salient, stable in partisan orientation, and at the focus of judicial selection, which copyright very much is not any of, divisions of the court aren't strongly determined by party even when they happen to align with party.
flyingfences 6y ago
TFA: > Eagle-eyed readers may have noticed that the argument seemed to split along partisan lines. Kavanaugh, Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch—all apparent Google skeptics—are the court's conservatives. Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan form the liberal wing. Chief Justice Roberts, who asked tough questions of both sides, has often been seen as the court's swing vote since the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2018. > Grimmelmann argues that this was a coincidence. The late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for example, was known as a copyright hawk and could easily have sided with Oracle if she were still alive. Before his elevation to the Supreme Court, Justice Gorsuch authored at least one dovish opinion on copyright issues. In the 2014 Aereo decision, all of the court's liberals (along with two conservatives) held that Aereo had infringed copyright, while three other conservatives dissented.

The questioning seems to imply there's a split among party lines. Is that a coincidence or is there some political aspect to this?

by jayd16 6y ago

The questioning seems to imply there's a split among party lines. Is that a coincidence or is there some political aspect to this?

tharne 6y ago

The American right in it's current form tends to treat everything as property and is very supportive of defending all things copyright related. A lot of this has to do with the waning influence of libertarian thought on the American right and it's drift towards a more corporatist philosophy. The American left is better in this respect, but has likewise become more corporatist in it's outlook over time.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> The questioning seems to imply there's a split among party lines. Is that a coincidence or is there some political aspect to this? A little bit of both; the right is more inclined to strong, especially commercial, property rights even for things like copyright that are expressly, both Constitutionally and statutorily, bounded and contingent, while the left is (from a judicial perspective) generally more supportive of public interest limitations in general and fair use, which while statutorily enshrined was judicially created based on the First Amendment before being written into statute, in particular. That said, its far from a perfect mapping and you'll often see splits that don't follow party lines in copyright, and the late Justice Ginsberg, while one of the more liberal justices on the court, was known to favor strong copyright. in general, outside of perennial hotbutton issues that are permanently both highly politically salient, stable in partisan orientation, and at the focus of judicial selection, which copyright very much is not any of, divisions of the court aren't strongly determined by party even when they happen to align with party.

flyingfences 6y ago

TFA: > Eagle-eyed readers may have noticed that the argument seemed to split along partisan lines. Kavanaugh, Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch—all apparent Google skeptics—are the court's conservatives. Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan form the liberal wing. Chief Justice Roberts, who asked tough questions of both sides, has often been seen as the court's swing vote since the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2018. > Grimmelmann argues that this was a coincidence. The late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for example, was known as a copyright hawk and could easily have sided with Oracle if she were still alive. Before his elevation to the Supreme Court, Justice Gorsuch authored at least one dovish opinion on copyright issues. In the 2014 Aereo decision, all of the court's liberals (along with two conservatives) held that Aereo had infringed copyright, while three other conservatives dissented.