Trump’s AG Defends Status Quo & Lexis Nexis In Georgia Annotated Codes Case

The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports in the latest in this ongoing case. Interesting to see the White House coming to the defence of Lexis Nexis so openly it makes us wonder how much money LN are going to be funneling towards his 2020 run.

Our reading of this is that the adminsitration is upholding the right of corporations to exclusively own and distribute what is meant to be public legal information accessible to all. We are all on tenterhooks waiting to see what the outcome of this case is not just for US State jurisdictions but also international jurisdictions. It has been the unfettered modus operandi of both Lexis & West to control and manage public information.

Will they maintain the status quo or will we see a ruling that indicates anybody can  collate, manage and distribute the public information ?

The Trump administration, in its legal brief, said this is enough to protect the annotated code under copyright law. “The annotations were created by contractors and their employees, not legislators or their staffs,” wrote U.S. Solicitor General Noel Franscisco.

Here’s the AJC report

Who owns the law in Georgia?

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court will take up that question as the justices consider whether the annotated version of Georgia code is protected under copyright law or should be made available to the public free of charge.

The hotly disputed case, pitting the state against an open records proponent, has caught the attention of the Trump administration, whose lawyers say Georgia’s code should be protected. At the same time, news media and civil rights organizations are also weighing in, contending the public should have unhindered access to the state code.

What is not in dispute is whether the laws enacted by the General Assembly can be subject to copyright protection — they can’t be. But the annotated code, essentially a reference guide filled with summaries of court decisions and legal writings, is a different matter altogether.

The case began four years ago when Georgia sued California-based public records activist Carl Malamud after he refused to stop publishing the annotated code on his Public.Resource.Org website. In October 2018, the federal appeals court in Atlanta ruled in Malamud’s favor, finding the code cannot receive copyright protection.

“The people … are the source of our law” and that makes them the code’s “constructive authors,” the court said. “And because they are the authors, the people are the owners of these works, meaning that the works are intrinsically public domain material and, therefore, uncopyrightable.”

But Georgia appealed that decision to the nation’s highest court and, in June, the justices agreed to hear it.

In its legal briefs, Georgia said a private contractor — not the Legislature — produces the annotated code, and this arrangement warrants copyright protection.

The making of the annotated code is overseen by a state commission composed of the speaker of the House, the lieutenant governor, eight lawmakers and five members of the State Bar. The commission contracts with LexisNexis, a data collection company, to prepare the code.

The work by LexisNexis is “resource- and time-intensive,” and the company bears the full cost of publishing the code, said the state of Georgia in its legal brief to the Supreme Court. In 2016, the state commission imposed price controls on the code, capping its cost at $404 for those who want to buy it. LexisNexis makes its money from the sales of the code.

The Trump administration, in its legal brief, said this is enough to protect the annotated code under copyright law. “The annotations were created by contractors and their employees, not legislators or their staffs,” wrote U.S. Solicitor General Noel Franscisco.

Numerous states rely on economic incentives to get companies such as LexisNexis to prepare and publish their annotated codes, said Josh Johnson, a University of Virginia law school lecturer who will argue the case Monday on Georgia’s behalf.

Read more at https://www.ajc.com/news/local/high-court-decide-georgia-official-code-free-the-public/ThYNDjOg6V9nPZvtqf59MN/