Survivors of mass shootings are using copyright law to control the release of perpetrators' writings and prevent further trauma.
Key points:
In July 2024, survivors of the Covenant School shooting in Nashville won a major legal victory when Judge I'Ashea Myles ruled that the shooter’s journals and other writings could not be released due to copyright law. The writings were signed over to the victims' families, who used copyright as a legal tool to control public access. This decision came after ongoing legal battles following the March 2023 shooting, where six people, including three children, were killed.
This ruling reflects a growing trend where survivors of mass shootings are turning to copyright law to protect themselves from being retraumatized by the media’s focus on perpetrators. For example, in another case, a Parkland survivor obtained the copyright to the shooter’s name, ensuring it cannot be reproduced without permission. The emotional toll of being repeatedly exposed to the names and works of these assailants drives this legal strategy, as survivors seek to shift the narrative from killers to victims.
Advocates also argue that suppressing the release of writings like these could prevent future tragedies. Research has shown that mass shootings often inspire copycats, with media coverage of perpetrators potentially elevating them into figures of notoriety. Judge Myles noted the copycat risk in her ruling, emphasizing that the shooter had idolized past mass killers and planned their attack based on writings from other perpetrators.
Despite the emotional and societal benefits seen by some, the use of copyright law in this context is controversial. Critics argue that copyright law was not designed for these situations, and some legal experts believe it has been misapplied in cases like the Nashville ruling. Still, survivors and families maintain that controlling public access to these materials is crucial for their healing process and for preventing further violence inspired by these acts.
As more survivors explore the use of copyright law, the courts will continue to grapple with its role in mass shooting cases. For now, survivors are leveraging this tool to regain some control over their stories and limit the media’s fixation on their trauma.
Six months after Credit Suisse rescue, investigation continues into its financial health.
In-house legal professionals talk about how they handle sudden changes in company policies.
Published weekly on Friday, the Legal.io Newsletter covers the latest in legal, talent & tech
In-house legal professionals share their thoughts on how to leave a job.
Published weekly on Friday, the Legal.io Newsletter covers the latest in legal, talent & tech.
In-house legal professionals weigh in on their ideas on making an ATS-friendly legal resume.
More and more industries are moving towards allowing for remote work. Professionals feel more productive and comfortable working in their chosen environments, which conventional offices cannot provide. Being steeped in tradition, the legal industry hasn’t adopted this “work from anywhere” mentality quickly. Generally, law firms continue to believe collective company spaces are necessary. Nevertheless, the growing movement of remote legal talent has been a pleasant surprise. And it seems a though remote work is destined to become the status quo.
Thirteen members of the European Parliament stated they accidentally voted the wrong way on a key amendment of a new European copyright directive, meaning the most controversial provisions of the directive might have been removed had they not erred.