I really want to understand the perspective of the other side of this case. Why did this museum care so much about this issue? They appear to have put an enormous legal effort into preventing the release of these point cloud scans. Why?
After reading the article, my interpretation isn't that they put an enormous legal effort into combating the release of the scans, it's that they put very little work into fighting against the OP, made a lot of bad arguments and knew from the start they would get away with it.
It comes off a little bit like they made a lazy decision at the outset, didn't want to reverse course to save face and knew they didn't need to back it up with anything....
I would go as far as to say the museum was negligent (by their own admission) and lazy, assuming (rightly so) the judicial system would protect them. Wild stuff.
IMO, their collected filings, both in the Paris tribunal and in the Conseil d'État, are a true trainwreck.
I don't discount the possibility that they were lazy (it seems likely) but I also think they may be truly incompetent and genuinely indifferent to the law, and without a doubt they behaved and argued in bad faith throughout.
simonw · · focus · HN ↗
awongh · · focus · HN ↗
It comes off a little bit like they made a lazy decision at the outset, didn't want to reverse course to save face and knew they didn't need to back it up with anything....
NBJack · · focus · HN ↗
CosmoWenman · · focus · HN ↗