Ludicrous?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| jrm Jul 13, 2007 10:59 AM EDT |
"What many may describe as a ludicrous decision by a US federal court" No, it was a ludicrous decision by the Copyright Royalty Board. That doesn't mean it isn't legally binding. The U.S. Court of Appeals merely ruled that the standards required for a stay were not met. People might disagree with that, but could we at least hear a logical argument for why this was a "ludicrous" decision? |
| dinotrac Jul 13, 2007 11:23 AM EDT |
jrm - Yes. The Court must determine that the decision by the Copyright Royalty Board -- which was upheld on appeal to the "copyright judges" went beyond the discretion of the board to issue, ie, was not within their power under the law. Good, bad, or indifferent, the decision may well be one that Congress has empowered them to make, which means we need Congressional action, not to call some court names for refusing to step outside it's proper role. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!