HARRY POTTER LEXICON, Part II: Conclusions of Law, Copyright Infringement

[foresthouse]

For ease of reading, a collection of Lexicon Links from Foresthouse Central:

The briefs are filed and here’s what’s going on in them
A few notes on the trial, commentary
More notes on the trial, commentary
Orson Scott Card vs. JK Rowling: He is WRONG (a discussion of Fair Use and the Ideas/Expression Dichotomy)
Link to the decision
Decision

Comments

[scifantasy]

I'm so tempted to adapt this format for my briefs for Contracts, Torts, and Civ Pro...especially Civ Pro.

[foresthouse]

It's typically known as IRAC (I kind of just did a variation of it, basically just moving what the court said around so that it fit the IRAC structure so it was easier to understand.)

It's taught because it's so logical, and that, of course, is what they want us law folks to be. :)

It goes:

Issue (question, here)
Rule (legal test)
Application (discussing the defendant's arguments, the facts and how the court applied the rule to them)
Conclusion (whether they met the burden or not)

[scifantasy]

It's taught because it's so logical, and that, of course, is what they want us law folks to be. :)

Yeah, right. Pull the other one, it has bells on.

*grin*

Thanks for the tip, though.

[foresthouse]

No prob. I'm sure they'll be teaching you lots of that kind of stuff as things go on. :)

[miraba]

Considering that WB was throwing everything at this case (including the kitchen sink), I was also surprised that they forgot to add several possible pieces of writing.

[foresthouse]

Seriously! You would think they'd have remembered to put those in. But, well - I'm sure there were binders upon binders of things involved in this case, so they *may* have had them and just forgotten to actually get them admitted...

[dduane]

Loving this. :)

[foresthouse]

I'm glad! I just figured it might be easier for people to digest than a 60-something page opinion! :)

I'll probably do some kind of discussion entry after. Still working through the opinion! Heh.