American Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org

Last updated

American Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org
Seal of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.png
Court Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Full case nameAmerican Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org

American Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org is a United States court case concerning copyright of published building codes and fire codes and public access to the same. In 2013, Public.Resource.Org was sued by the American Society for Testing and Materials, the National Fire Protection Association, and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers for scanning and making available building codes and fire codes which these organizations consider their copyrighted property. The case was heard in the District Court of the District of Columbia, with Judge Tanya S. Chutkan presiding. [1] [2] Chutkan ruled against Public.Resource.Org and ordered Malamud to delete all the standards from the Internet. [3] Public.Resource.Org appealed the case to the D.C. Circuit. In 2018, the D.C. Circuit reversed and remanded the decision, holding that the fair use doctrines had been improperly applied. [4] In March 2022 Chutkan issued an opinion that would allow Public.Resource.Org to reproduce 184 standards under fair use, partially reproduce 1 standard, and deny reproduction of 32 standards that were found to differ in substantive ways from those incorporated by law. [5] ASTM et al. appealed the case to the D.C. Circuit, which affirmed the trial court decision. [6]

Contents

Support for Public.Resource.Org

A number of library and public interest associations weighed in supporting the position of Public.Resource.Org. [7] These organizations include American Association of Law Libraries, [8] [9] Electronic Frontier Foundation, [10] [11] Library Futures, [12] Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, [13] and Public Citizen. [14]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Happy Birthday to You</span> Birthday song

"Happy Birthday to You", also known as "Happy Birthday", is a song traditionally sung to celebrate a person's birthday. According to the 1998 Guinness World Records, it is the most recognized song in the English language, followed by "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow". The song's base lyrics have been translated into at least 18 languages. The melody of "Happy Birthday to You" comes from the song "Good Morning to All", which has traditionally been attributed to American sisters Patty and Mildred J. Hill in 1893, although the claim that the sisters composed the tune is disputed.

<i>Official Code of Georgia Annotated</i> Compendium of all laws in the U.S. state of Georgia

The Official Code of Georgia Annotated or OCGA is the compendium of all laws in the U.S. state of Georgia. Like other U.S. state codes, its legal interpretation is subject to the United States Constitution, the United States Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, and the state's constitution. It is to the state what the United States Code (U.S.C.) is to the federal government.

Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that statutory or administrative sex classifications were subject to intermediate scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The case was argued by future Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg while she was working for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Golan v. Holder, 565 U.S. 302 (2012), was a Supreme Court case that dealt with copyright and the public domain. It held that the "limited time" language of the United States Constitution's Copyright Clause does not preclude the extension of copyright protections to works previously in the public domain.

PACER is an electronic public access service for United States federal court documents. It allows users to obtain case and docket information from the United States district courts, United States courts of appeals, and United States bankruptcy courts. The system is managed by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts in accordance with the policies of the Judicial Conference, headed by the Chief Justice of the United States. As of 2013, it holds more than 500 million documents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Association of Law Libraries</span> American nonprofit membership association of law library professionals

The American Association of Law Libraries "is a nonprofit educational organization with over 5,000 members nationwide. AALL's mission is to promote and enhance the value of law libraries to the legal and public communities, to foster the profession of law librarianship, and to provide leadership in the field of legal information and information policy."

The American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) is an American legal organization founded by former Reagan Administration official Robert B. Carleson in 1998 as a conservative counter to the American Civil Liberties Union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public.Resource.Org</span>

Public.Resource.Org (PRO) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation dedicated to publishing and sharing public domain materials in the United States and internationally. It was founded by Carl Malamud and is based in Sebastopol, California.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ivi, Inc.</span>

Ivi Inc. also called Ivi , is a Seattle-based American corporation which offers a software application providing live video streaming over the Internet for a flat rate. Ivi is the first online cable company. The Ivi TV player is a downloadable software application that runs on Windows, Macintosh, or Linux computers that offers live television over the Internet.

Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U.S. 154 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving copyright law. The Court held that failure to register a copyright under Section 411 (a) of the United States Copyright Act does not limit a Federal Court's jurisdiction over claims of infringement regarding unregistered works.

<i>Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc.</i>

Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., 934 F. Supp. 2d 640 , is a case from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York concerning copyright infringement of digital music. In ReDigi, record label Capitol Records claimed copyright infringement against ReDigi, a service that allows resale of digital music tracks originally purchased from the iTunes Store. Capitol Records' motion for a preliminary injunction against ReDigi was denied, and oral arguments were given on October 5, 2012.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act</span> US act, aiming to deny significant foreign narcotics traffickers access to the U.S. financial system

The Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, better known as the Kingpin Act, is landmark federal legislation in the United States intended to address international narcotics trafficking by imposing United States sanctions on foreign persons and entities involved in the drug trade.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tanya S. Chutkan</span> American judge (born 1962)

Tanya Sue Chutkan is a Jamaican-born American lawyer and jurist serving as a U.S. district judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. She is the presiding judge over the criminal trial of former U.S. president Donald Trump over his attempts to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election, including the events leading up to the January 6, 2021, United States Capitol attack.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Remedy Clarification Act</span> United States copyright law

The Copyright Remedy Clarification Act (CRCA) is a United States copyright law that attempted to abrogate sovereign immunity of states for copyright infringement. The CRCA amended 17 USC 511(a):

In general. Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity, shall not be immune, under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal Court by any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity, for a violation of any of the exclusive rights of a copyright owner provided by sections 106 through 122, for importing copies of phonorecords in violation of section 602, or for any other violation under this title.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Free Law Project</span> Free legal research tools and database

Free Law Project is a United States federal 501(c)(3) Oakland-based nonprofit that provides free access to primary legal materials, develops legal research tools, and supports academic research on legal corpora. Free Law Project has several initiatives that collect and share legal information, including the largest collection of American oral argument audio, daily collection of new legal opinions from 200 United States courts and administrative bodies, the RECAP Project, which collects documents from PACER, and user-generated Supreme Court citation visualizations. Their data helped The Wall Street Journal expose 138 cases of conflict of interest cases regarding violations by federal judges.

Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court decided under what circumstances aesthetic elements of "useful articles" can be restricted by copyright law. The Court created a two-prong "separability" test, granting copyrightability based on separate identification and independent existence; the aesthetic elements must be identifiable as art if mentally separated from the article's practical use, and must qualify as copyrightable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works if expressed in any medium.

<i>CREW and National Security Archive v. Trump and EOP</i> Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and National Security Archive v. Trump and EOP, No. 1:17-cv-01228, is a case pending before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the archivist National Security Archive, allege that the defendants, President Donald Trump and elements of the Executive Office of the President, are in violation of the Presidential Records Act by deleting electronic messages on Twitter and using other electronic messaging applications without required archival records.

<i>American Civil Liberties Union v. Trump and Pence</i> Litigation

American Civil Liberties Union v. Trump and Pence, No. 1:17-cv-01351, is a case pending before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs, the watchdog group American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), alleges that the defendants, President Donald Trump and the Vice President Michael Pence, are in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act by establishing the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity for the purpose of supporting the President's "claim that he won the popular vote in the 2016 election—once millions of supposedly illegal votes are subtracted from the count."

Massachusetts Lobstermen's Association v. Ross is a United States District Court case in the District of Columbia in which the court determined whether or not a President may establish a marine national monument, the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument, under the authority of the Antiquities Act of 1906. The case represents the first time that the President's authority to create an offshore marine monument under the Act was directly challenged in court. While the District Court upheld the President's authority to designate the monument under the authority bestowed by the Antiquities Act, the case was appealed to the D.C. Circuit and awaits further judicial review.

Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., No. 18-1150, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding "whether the government edicts doctrine extends to—and thus renders uncopyrightable—works that lack the force of law, such as the annotations in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated" (OCGA). On April 27, 2020, the Court ruled 5–4 that the OCGA cannot be copyrighted because the OCGA's annotations were "authored by an arm of the legislature in the course of its legislative duties"; thus the Court found that the annotations fall under the government edicts doctrine and are ineligible for copyright.

References

  1. "Public.Resource.Org Fights Back Against Copyright Lawsuit". August 20, 2013. Retrieved July 2, 2014.
  2. ASTM v. Public.Resource.org (Docket Report), vol. No. 1:13-cv-01215, D.D.C., August 6, 2013, retrieved July 24, 2017 via Recap ( PACER current view Lock-red-alt.svg)
  3. Masnick, Mike (February 3, 2017). "Federal Court Basically Says It's Okay To Copyright Parts Of Our Laws". Techdirt.
    "Memorandum And Opinion" (PDF), ASTM v. Public.Resource.org (Court Filing), D.D.C., vol. No. 1:13-cv-01215, no. Docket 175, February 2, 2017, retrieved July 24, 2017 via Recap
    "Order" (PDF), ASTM v. Public.Resource.org (Court Filing), D.D.C., vol. No. 1:13-cv-01215, no. Docket 176, February 2, 2017, retrieved July 24, 2017 via Recap
  4. "American Society for Testing v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc". Stanford University. July 17, 2018. Retrieved September 23, 2019.
  5. "AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS et al v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC., No. 1:2013cv01215 - Document 239 (D.D.C. 2022)". Justia Law. p. 36.
  6. American Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org(D.C. Cir.September 12, 2023). Text
  7. See, e.g., Amicus Brief of Sixty-Six Library Associations, Nonprofit Organizations, Legal Technology Companies, Former Senior Government Officials, Librarians, Innovators, and Professors of Law, submitted Sept. 22, 2017.
  8. American Association of Law Libraries. "Amicus brief in support of Public.Resource.Org, American Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc". AALL.
  9. Duan, Charles; Rose, Meredith F. (September 25, 2017). "Amuci Curiae" (PDF). American Association of Law Libraries.
  10. "Freeing the Law with Public.Resource.Org". Electronic Frontier Foundation. February 2, 2016.
  11. "Amicus brief - Library Futures, EveryLibrary Institute, Authors Alliance, Public Knowledge". Electronic Frontier Foundation. December 12, 2022.
  12. Ziskina, Juliya. "Library Futures Files Collaborative Amici in American Society for Testing and Materials, et al. v. Public.Resource.Org". libraryfutures.net.
  13. "American Society for Testing and Materials v. Public.Resource.Org". The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
  14. Public Citizen. "American Society for Testing and Materials v. Public.Resource.Org". Public Citizen.