Court: Photographer has no recourse against university copyright infringement

Re:Court: Photographer has no recourse against university co... by r00fus on Friday June 14, 2019 @01:12AM (#20180726)

So wait, universities can patent things, but then have sovereign immunity from infringing copyright?

I know the other parts of government are prohibited from being able to get copyright or patents, so that means sovereign immunity makes sense in a heavy-handed way, but allowing both ownership and immunity seems... like having your cake and eating it too.

Who's the judge I wonder...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Court: Photographer has no recourse against university co... by icebraining on Friday June 14, 2019 @03:07AM (#20181059)

The problem isn't the judge; it's that the defendant didn't claim copyright infringement, but a "taking" of property. I'd rather like to know who is the lawyer.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Court: Photographer has no recourse against university co... by caf on Friday June 14, 2019 @03:29AM (#20181116)

If you read the link posted elsewhere in the thread by Mathnerd314, it is apparent that the question of whether the states can be sued for copyright infringement is a live one, on which the Supreme Court has just granted certiorari.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Court: Photographer has no recourse against university co... by icebraining on Friday June 14, 2019 @05:48AM (#20181679)

Thanks; I was led astray by another case (Cambridge University Press v. Patton) in which a State University was found guilty, but it seems they simply failed to raise the immunity argument and therefore the court didn't apply it.

[ Parent | on HN ]