Source: https://jolt.richmond.edu/jolt-archive/v5i3/tussey.html

This article explores the legal battles between Matthew Bender and West Publishing regarding the copyrightability of judicial case reports in the digital era. The author analyzes how the Second Circuit Court of Appeals rejected West’s claims for copyright protection over internal pagination and minor editorial textual revisions. By applying the Feist standard, the court determined that these elements lacked the minimal creativity required for protection, categorizing them as unoriginal facts or standard industry practices. However, the author criticizes the court's reasoning for conflating the standards for compilations and derivative works while unnecessarily complicating the definition of electronic "copies." Ultimately, the source argues for a clearer originality standard to prevent established publishers from using litigation to maintain monopolies over public domain law.