[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Pavlovich dvd case heading to SCOTUS

What exactly does it mean to stay a finding of no jurisdiction?

Usually, don't you just petition for certiori? What is the urgency here that
could possibly justify a stay? What is the immediate effect of this stay? Will
Pavlovich now be treated "as if" jurisdiction applied to him, so that he too is
included within the current ruling that DeCSS does not violate trade secrets?

O'Connor is a sharp Justice, but it seems like she jumped off half-cocked on
this one.

--- "James S. Tyre" <jstyre@jstyre.com> wrote:
> At 12:14 AM 12/31/2002 -0500, Jeremy Erwin wrote:
> >As no one else has seen fit to post this rather important development
> >
> >http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2002/12/30/scotus_dvd/index.html
> >
> >The Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether the California courts 
> >should have jurisdiction over Matt Pavlovich, and whether websites meets 
> >the "minimum contact" standard required for such jurisdiction.
> No, the Supreme Court has not agreed to do anything.  One Justice, Sandra 
> Day O'Connor, agreed to a stay while there are additional submissions wrt 
> whether the Court should grant cert.
> This does not mean that O'Connor will agree to hear the case, and no one 
> knows what other Justices might say when the time comes, which this 
> wasn't.  It takes 5 Justice's vote to grant cert., this was a relatively 
> routine stay application that can be, and was, acted on by a single Justice.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> James S. Tyre                               mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
> Law Offices of James S. Tyre          310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
> 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512               Culver City, CA 90230-4969
> Co-founder, The Censorware Project             http://censorware.net

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.