This seems like the appropriate thread to ask…
In general, a person’s text messages are protected by copyright. How does that copyright interact with public court records?
I didn’t include the earlier discovery trouble in the interest of brevity. As for the “please disregard “ reply, it was part of the mistrial hearing this morning. The whole trial has been on YouTube.
The whole thing seems to depend on if “please disregard” has any legal weight, considering that no technical correction was actually made. The parties obviously disagree.
Thanks! The news stories often leave out the details.
I’m not a lawyer, but I doubt that copyright would prevent whatever is the standard public disclosure of court documents entered into evidence. It might mean that someone couldn’t take those records, put them into a book and sell it on Amazon.
IANAL. I would expect that they ran it by the judge before deciding on their own…?
Generally, there are limits and exceptions to copyright.
If the court were to try to sell copies of the text messages verbatim for profit, that would be a bad thing. But there’s a legitimate public interest in maintaining public records, so there shouldn’t be a problem there.
Of course, that doesn’t stop the occasional attempted legal chicanery around things like that. For example, attempting to copyright one’s own name, which you really can’t do (though you can sort of trademark a name in certain circumstances).
And this is the point where the several months spent actively disrespecting and antagonizing the judge come back to bite him in the ass.
Not to mention insulting the jury just days ago… the jury that is deciding how much compensation he owes in the case he just lost.
I hope he is reduced to penury.
In Before: Jones starts hawking a supplement that increases the size of your penury.
I just want to plug the Knowledge Fight podcast, those guys have been deconstructing Alex’s show for over 700 episodes. They have done truly amazing analysis of the various depositions that have been made public. I promise you, Alex Jones is much more despicable than you know.
I imagine Dr Evil saying: “I’m evil, but I’m not a monster like Alex Jones!”
Fair use covers commentary and newsworthy reproduction. In addition, it’s… extremely unlikely that those text messages were registered for copyright, which means that Jones couldn’t get statutory damages, he’d have to argue for actual damages, which as other posters have said might come into play if someone was selling a book that included all the text messages, but in the absence of that it’s hard to argue “Because the news reported on my text messages that prevented me from selling a book of them” since he clearly had no intention of doing so and there’s arguably no market for such a thing.
Does the confidentiality limit apply to everything or just the court’s own proceedings? I.e., does the Jan 6 Committee get everything or just what the judge allows?
Judges don’t get to jail people for perjury. Like any other crime, there would have to be a police investigation, formal charges, a trial under a different judge and conviction by a jury. Only then could he be jailed.
Maybe not perjury, but I’m pretty sure they can for contempt of court.
Disregarding the registered part, which isn’t necessary to obtain copyright, people tend to forget this:
A text message doesn’t reach that threshold.
"The defense filed an emergency of protection regarding Alex Jones’ attorney F. Andino Reynal accidentally sending Jones’ cellphone record to plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Bankston. The defense asked for a mistrial but was denied. "
This is correct. One minor nitpick: there are a couple types of civil proceedings where there is a constitutional right to counsel and ineffective assistance of counsel can be a basis for appeal, but this is not one of them. But, for example, juvenile dependency proceedings (for the court to take away your kids, thus depriving you of your fundamental right to have and raise children), immigration proceedings, and I believe perhaps certain types of probate proceedings (like for conservatorships) implicate fundamental rights and therefore allow for an appeal based on IAC. There are limits, though; in dependency, for example, if you reject your court-appointed attorney in favor of private counsel, you can’t appeal based on IAC. As you say, if you pick your lawyer and you pick a bad one, that’s on you.
A client in a civil case can sue his attorney for malpractice and may win money damages, but it’s not a basis to reverse the judgment in the underlying case.
Yes, I expect he will. But then, the bar may be opening their own investigation just based on the news coverage. They can do that, too. Unfortunately, we probably won’t get much in the way of updates on that until it’s resolved.
Not specifically for failing to commit an illegal act. I haven’t dug deep enough to say whether there’s some aspect of what they did that he can sue them for.
Copyright protection is not really relevant for court records. That doesn’t mean someone not connected to the case can just start infringing your copyright just because it happened to be in a court record.
Someone linked to it in another thread but here’s the relevant rule for the ten day thing:
(d) Privilege not waived by production. A party who produces material or information without intending to waive a claim of privilege does not waive that claim under these rules or the Rules of Evidence if - within ten days or a shorter time ordered by the court, after the producing party actually discovers that such production was made - the producing party amends the response, identifying the material or information produced and stating the privilege asserted. If the producing party thus amends the response to assert a privilege, the requesting party must promptly return the specified material or information and any copies pending any ruling by the court denying the privilege.
http://www.stcl.edu/lib/TexasRulesProject/TRCP186-193/rule193-3Nov1999.htm
To me, that seems fairly clear. Jones’ team had to make specific claims and file an amendment. If they do then the materials need to be sent back (or, I presume, in the modern digital age just trash their copy). And, implicitly, if they don’t then the materials don’t need to be sent back (nor deleted).