Ventura County Star on CGF Lawsuit

[Paul S]

It is simply an obstructionist move on the part of Sheriff Brooks. He can afford to bow his back and go to court. After all, Ventura County Counsel's deputies are paid whether they are actively engaged in a court scheduled case or quietly doing research in the law library.

Also please consider that the Sheriff knows well...that ANY of the some 1200 records he speaks of which simply has "personal and property protection" as the Good Cause reason, sinks his ship as far as limiting what his department will accept as Good Cause.

[Shotgun Man]

It is simply an obstructionist move on the part of Sheriff Brooks. He can afford to bow his back and go to court. After all, Ventura County Counsel's deputies are paid whether they are actively engaged in a court scheduled case or quietly doing research in the law library.

Also please consider that the Sheriff knows well...that ANY of the some 1200 records he speaks of which simply has "personal and property protection" as the Good Cause reason, sinks his ship as far as limiting what his department will accept as Good Cause.

I would expect Ventura to farm this out to outside counsel.

[Shotgun Man]

Let's not violate other people's copyright, shall we? // Librarian

We're not allowed to quote news articles?

I cannot quote the text of an article on the Brady Bunch site?

I guess, but crazy. Maybe CGF should be challenging this. (Kinda kidding. CGF should only challenge quoting a news article in a case that affects their interests.)

[Lulfas]

Let's not violate other people's copyright, shall we? // Librarian

We're not allowed to quote news articles?

I cannot quote the text of an article on the Brady Bunch site?

I guess, but crazy. Maybe CGF should be challenging this. (Kinda kidding. CGF should only challenge quoting a news article in a case that affects their interests.)

You can use short quotes. I believe the limit I've seen in other places was 200 characters?

[CHS]

Let's not violate other people's copyright, shall we? // Librarian

We're not allowed to quote news articles?

I cannot quote the text of an article on the Brady Bunch site?

You can't quote the entire article verbatim. That's blatant copyright infringement.

You can quote bits of it, or say, the opening paragraph. That's stuff that's all covered under fair use. But the complete article is right out.

And yes, it even applies to the Brady's.

[CCWFacts]

You can use short quotes. I believe the limit I've seen in other places was 200 characters?

There's no hard-set limit. Ultimately it's a question that could be decided in civil court and would depend on many factors, such as the context, the purpose of the copying (scholarly research? filler in a magazine?), and many other things.

But as BDSmchs says, copying the entire thing is right out.

[Librarian]

Let's not violate other people's copyright, shall we? // Librarian

We're not allowed to quote news articles?

I cannot quote the text of an article on the Brady Bunch site?

I guess, but crazy. Maybe CGF should be challenging this. (Kinda kidding. CGF should only challenge quoting a news article in a case that affects their interests.)

There is this sleazy law firm, which shall go nameless here, that is suing bloggers and other on-line sites for unauthorized use of copyrighted material. That makes things somewhat immediate - but it's always been illegal to post/repost whole articles without written permission. Bits of an article or other work for criticism (or mockery!) are OK as 'fair use', but the actual amount covered under 'fair use' is not determined.

Thus, as a habit, we should be posting links to articles that seem appropriate, and perhaps the title and a first-paragraph topic sentence.

An approachable discussion of the issue is at http://aboutweblogs.com/content/view/31/1/

[N6ATF]

Crap, I was never sure so probably half of my quotes are of entire articles... I was just thinking about this because of Sleazy Law Firm v SAF.

[socal2310]

It is simply an obstructionist move on the part of Sheriff Brooks. He can afford to bow his back and go to court. After all, Ventura County Counsel's deputies are paid whether they are actively engaged in a court scheduled case or quietly doing research in the law library.

Also please consider that the Sheriff knows well...that ANY of the some 1200 records he speaks of which simply has "personal and property protection" as the Good Cause reason, sinks his ship as far as limiting what his department will accept as Good Cause.

Let's not forget that courts rarely move in a manner that could be called "hasty." I fully expect Brooks to stall long enough to make it Dean's problem.

Ryan

[hoffmang]

Let's not forget that courts rarely move in a manner that could be called "hasty." I fully expect Brooks to stall long enough to make it Dean's problem.

Ryan

No and Yes. PRA cases are specifically set up to move faster. However, that doesn't mean that the election will not be over before we get a ruling.

This effort has never been about politics, though I suspect some sheriffs think it is. We just want to get the records in the hands of future applicants as soon as possible.

-Gene

[yellowfin]

^ Their side of the matter is political, so of course they'd label ours as such.

[AndrewMendez]

Shall we get back on topic?

This is only a cheap stalling method. They will be sued, lose, and find some other road block for us to break thru.

[tiki]

We're concerned about costing the taxpayers $14k redacting the info, so we are going to drop $200k to fight it.

[Rossi357]

^ Their side of the matter is political, so of course they'd label ours as such.

I would say there is nothing wrong with having a political agenda. All of our state representatives have taken it to an art form.
I do favor the legal agenda.

[vintagearms]

I know Brooks and his staff. If they were using their own money, this wouldn't be an issue. With him its a us vs them situation which is complete BS. I'm glad the VCstar didnt make it a hit piece about CCW though.