Here's an author's dilemma. Imagine you'd written a treatise for West. After a few years, you decided to pen an update - but West declined. And when West sliced your meager compensation for the annual supplement, you chose to abandon the project. Now West decides to deliver a new supplement, claiming that you are the author. And that supplement is sufficiently mediocre that West's own lawyer has to admit that the company "is not proud" of it. What do you do?
If you're David Rudofsky, of Penn Law, and Len Sosnov, of Widener Law, you sue. Rudovsky and Sosnov are in Federal Court to enjoin West from selling an update of their volume, Criminal Procedure: Law, Commentary and Forms. They're demanding that West notify all existing recipients of the materials that they are not the authors - and to offer unhappy purchasers a refund.
Although they are seeking some monetary damages, the plaintiffs certainly seem to feel personally offended. According to the Daily Intelligencer:
Rudovsky said he was "stunned" when the supplement was released in December that had both his and Sosnov's names on the cover but almost nothing new in terms of content. "'Sham' is the only word that comes to mind," Rudovsky said, adding that he and Sosnov decided to file suit because they were concerned "that our names were being used on a sham product."
Briefs in the case are here.
Nice blog as for me. I'd like to read a bit more about this topic. Thanks for posting this information.
Posted by: Term Papers | March 12, 2010 at 02:23 AM