Disputes over Software, Census Top the Agenda in Key Week for Court Hotly Contested Cases Expected to Further Polarize Justices

Article excerpt

THE first Supreme Court session of 1996 opens today with a week of cases more compelling than usual for this term.

For the next three days, the court hears arguments on subjects ranging from computer software, to congressional powers, to a bitter dispute over how US census figures are arrived at - a case that may be one of the more significant of the year.

Tuesday, the Rodney King beating incident rises yet again. The court will hear arguments on whether the two police officers convicted in 1993 of violating Mr. King's civil rights received punishments that were too light.

Also, adding weight to the term, the court agreed Friday to take an important Colorado free-speech case that will test the constitutionality of spending limits that political parties place on their candidates.

Still, the high court docket in 1996 is one of the lightest ever. In recent years, the nine justices, often polarized, have tried to avoid controversy. But this week's cases will be highly contested and will likely split the court.

In today's arguments, a showdown over computer software may change the copyright rules for the industry - a change with potentially great commercial impact.

The dispute pits two major software firms, Lotus Development Corp. and Borland International Inc., against each other. Borland's "Quattro" financial software now operates on the various "menus" of symbols and commands that Lotus innovated for its popular "Lotus 1-2-3" spreadsheet software. That makes it easy - too easy, says Lotus - for consumers to switch to the Borland product.

Lotus says its menus are protected by existing copyright laws. Borland claims the copyright does not apply to software systems such as Lotus 1-2-3, arguing that such systems have become a standard in the industry.

What the nine justices must decide is whether the Lotus computer user menu is so standard that current federal copyright laws do not apply.

On Tuesday, the court hears a death- penalty case that dips into newly raised questions about the way power is delegated between the president and Congress.

The case at hand comes out of a military court that sentenced Army Pvt. Dwight Loving to death after finding he had robbed and murdered two cab drivers and attempted to murder another during a 24-hour spree in 1988 that also included two convenience-store armed robberies. …


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.