Question about Judges Reading

By llanitedave

August 23 2004

PJ said: "It is, I think, such a close match in thought that I really think
the judges must have read his book and been influenced by it."

Is it customary for judges in a case to specifically obtain external reading
materials that might relate, but are not directly part of the exhibit portfolio?
Would the judges have assigned themselves the book as "required
background"? Do attorneys ever reference such works to familiarize judges
with the wider implications of an issue?

Could judge Kimball be asked to pick up a copy of "The Cathedral and the
Bazaar"?

---
Of course we need to communicate -- that goes without saying!

06:10 PM EDT

By PJ

August 23 2004

Judges are human beings, who read books just like the rest of us. Lessig's works are important and obviously well-known, so it isn't beyond the likelihoods that judges would read it, not necessarily as part of thinking about a case, but just because they are human beings who are interested in this large debate, just like we are.

I get the impression that the judges saw how Napster basically was destroyed, and they learned something from the experience. It's how I see the courts deal with new thoughts all the time -- first they rule in old-fashioned ways, because they don't get it yet. But then, they start to understand that this is something brand new, and they start to clue in. Books like Lessig's are part of the clue-in process, which I'm sure he does deliberately with that very hope.

07:29 PM EDT