Levine's First Rule of Law: "It is inherently illegitimate for courts to use subjective artistic interpretations in order to decide substantive issues of law."
I have previously expounded on the mess that is created when lawyers and judges ignore Levine's First Rule of Law.
More examples here.
The ensuing debate over this issue is sad.
After all,
this isn't a reasonable debate over how to interpret the text of a law. Rather, it is an debate over how to personally interpret the underlying meanings of creative works, and then deciding if such works should be deemed "unlawful" based on one's own subjective artistic interpretations.
Mr. Coleman is right about one thing - Schwimmer's interpretation of the "Pretty Woman" case would indeed craft an exception which swallows the rule. Coleman's only problem is that he seems to imply that this would be a bad thing. After all, this otherwise intelligent lawyer seems to endorse (or at least tolerate) the ridiculous lawsuit against the "Dick and Jane" parody (or is it the Dick and Jane "satire"???).
The "Dick and Jane" lawsuit may be legally valid - but that's the problem.
Levine's First Rule of Law....Read it. Know it. Live it.
Posted by Justin Levine at January 31, 2005 06:29 PM | TrackBack