Oh, the irony.

with my copyright paper, i feel like Justice Blackmun and Sony. (scroll down, it's the first post of the same title - at the bottom - of that archive).

i don't feel like Blackmun because of his reasoning, per se...but because of my ...er...steadfastness (is that a word? it's almost 5 am).

As Ms. Greenhouse put it on page 121: "[I]t was typical of Blackmun to hold fast to territory he had staked out and to become deeply invested in its defense." This was certainly true in Sony, where Blackmun was assigned to write the majority opinion affirming, but he ended up having to convert his opinion into a dissent. He was outmanuevered by Justice Stevens and was his own worst enemy in losing a fragile, but sustainable 6-3 majority.

He stated: "Five votes are not that important to me when I feel that proper legal principles are involved." As I pointed out, the result of his refusal to budge was a majority opinion (by Justice Stevens) that was far worse, from Blackmun's perspective, than any changes Blackmun had been asked to make.

this copyright paper is taking me way too long b/c as a Gen-X (sub-gen MTV or sub-gen Boomerang) (sidenote: i love these expressions, i can't stop using them)...these policy issues - each concurring opinion's implications in Grokster - mean too much to me.

i can't "simply" decide whether to codify secondary liability. everytime i read a law review article or a case, something else gets into my mind.

where are my legal writing TA skills? short. concise. rule. application. Red pen, come back to me!!


**update: i feel that this makes me seem un-Blackmun b/c i'm wishy washy as to "new ideas"...but really, its more about me having a strong opinion & not wanting to budge...even though i know its a harder argument to make.