SCOTUS couldn't take up a copyright case because four justices have book deals
pessimizer
48 points
4 comments
October 20, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 168.4ms across 10,084 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Supreme Court rejects music labels' challenge to copyright termination sib · 18 pts · October 19, 2026 · 47% similar
- Unsealed Briefs in Authors’ Case v. Microsoft/OpenAI papergirl · 610 pts · September 27, 2026 · 47% similar
- Victory Appeals Court Rejects Expansive New Copyright Claim hn_acker · 15 pts · September 17, 2026 · 46% similar
- EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype DeepLogin · 161 pts · September 01, 2026 · 45% similar
- Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude BeetleB · 248 pts · July 21, 2026 · 43% similar
Discussion Highlights (3 comments)
digitaltrees
If you can’t do your job because you have a personality conflict of interest that you self selected maybe you shouldn’t have that job.
not_a_bot_4sho
Rare bipartisanship in action. Yay?
SwellJoe
SCOTUS has made a mockery of itself in recent years. Naked partisanship, disregard for precedent and "settled law" (according to their own words during confirmation), openly accepting bribes. It's maybe the worst thing about the degradation of politics in recent years, because they can't be voted out. If you want to be a writer, leave the court and become a writer. If you want to directly invest in the stock market (instead of via a blind trust), leave the court. If you want to accept a quarter of a million dollar "gift" from your "friend" (who just happens to regularly have business before the court), leave the court and go camping or whatever the fuck. It's exhausting how degraded everything about American institutions has become, including one that's supposed to be above the fray.