Copyright Law

Fastcase refiles suit against Casemaker over right to publish Georgia regulations

  •  
  •  
  •  
  • Print

fastcase

Fastcase has filed a revised federal lawsuit against its competitor Casemaker over the right to publish Georgia’s administrative rules and regulations after a federal court tossed the earlier suit on jurisdictional grounds.

The new suit (PDF) adds details on why the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, part of Fastcase’s bid to satisfy the requirements of diversity jurisdiction, LawSites by Robert Ambrogi reports. The suit also says Lawriter has threatened to assert a copyright claim against Fastcase, giving the court federal question jurisdiction.

Legal research company Fastcase had filed the declaratory judgment suit after it received a takedown notice from Casemaker’s parent company, Lawriter, that objected to Fastcase’s offering of the regulations through its fee-based service.

Lawriter has a contract with Georgia’s secretary of state to publish the regulations and make them freely available online, according to the Fastcase lawsuit. Fastcase has a contract with the State Bar of Georgia to build a database of Georgia law, including the regulations, that is available as a member benefit, the suit says.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Batten Sr. had tossed the suit last month. Batten has said there was no federal question jurisdiction because Lawriter had not registered a copyright on the regulations. He also said Fastcase had failed to allege damages in excess of $75,000 with specificity.

Fastcase is at risk of breaching the state bar contract if it doesn’t publish the regulations, with potential damages exceeding $75,000, Fastcase CEO Ed Walters told LawSites. He also cited Casemaker’s terms of use, which say that visitors to its website agree that using the information for commercial purposes causes damages of at least $20,000 to Lawriter.

“Since we ordinarily update these sites multiple times per week, and sell access to the Georgia regs multiple times per day, Casemaker’s own valuation of its damages puts the amount in dispute more than $75,000,” Walters told LawSites.

Give us feedback, share a story tip or update, or report an error.