Why PMBR doesn't teach copyrights
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin Bar course fined $12 million for copyingBy Jerry Crimmins The bar review course is known as the Preliminary Multistate Bar Review. It is regularly offered in Illinois. A three-day PMBR course was offered this year at Chicago-Kent College of Law, Northwestern University School of Law, and the University of Illinois College of Law in preparation for the July Illinois bar exam. PMBR has also been offered at The John Marshall Law School, which once partially subsidized the course for its students. The lawsuit alleging copyright infringement was filed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, which produces the Multistate Bar Examination. U.S. District Court Judge John P. Fullam in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania concluded after a bench trial that the owners of PMBR, Robert Feinberg and Dona Zimmerman, and their company, Multistate Legal Studies, ''willfully copied MBE questions.'' Fullam said nearly all of the 113 questions used in the PMBR course that were challenged as copyright infringements ''are substantially similar to copyrighted MBE questions.'' ''In many instances, evidence of copying practically leaps from the page,'' the judge continued. The judge also cited as evidence the advertisements for PMBR. One testimonial used as a PMBR advertisement stated an individual ''breezed through the exam because [he] recognized so many of the questions from PMBR,'' the judge wrote. Another testimonial exclaimed in large, boldface type, ''It Was Deja Vu All Over Again. I Was Amazed How Similar The Actual MBE Was To PMBR!'' ''Feinberg has personally taken the MBE more than 20 times and Zimmerman more than a dozen,'' the judge related. In February, 2003, when Feinberg took the MBE in Anchorage, Alaska, he was stopped while leaving the room with his handwritten notes from the test in violation of the rules, according to the opinion. That incident caused the National Conference of Bar Examiners to review the PMBR course materials and file the lawsuit. Feinberg also admitted in the litigation that ''he used the notes of PMBR employees who have taken the MBE in recent years,'' the judge said. The defendants, however, stated that they produced their bar review course as an independent creation. Feinberg said he produced almost all the PMBE questions and answers himself by relying on hornbooks, treatises, reporters, and published cases. The judge rejected this defense. According to Fullam, ''PMBR is both popular and lucrative, teaching more than 40,000 students in 2004, nearly 60 percent of those taking the MBE, and bringing in more than $16 million in gross revenues that year.'' Fullam enjoined the defendants from copying, duplicating, selling or leasing any questions obtained from the National Conference of Bar Examiners copyrighted tests. The National Conference of Bar Examiners was represented by Barbara W. Mather and Christopher J. Huber of Pepper, Hamilton in Philadelphia and Robert A. Burgoye and Caroline M. Mew of Fulbright & Jaworski in Washington, D.C. The judge also awarded attorneys fees and costs to the plaintiffs, the amount yet to be determined. ''By exposing its students to questions likely to appear on the MBE, PMBR undermined the integrity of the bar examination, possibly causing the admission of unqualified applicants,'' Fullam asserted. The National Conference of Bar Examiners develops testing materials, including the Multistate Bar Examination, used in bar exams in more than 50 jurisdictions. The MBE is a 200-question, multiple-choice test administered in February and July each year. Typically state bar exams run two days with one day's testing on state law and another day for the MBE. The MBE covers topics in contracts, criminal law and procedure, constitutional law, real property, evidence and torts. |
Great article. Thanks for the post. I look forward to your future work.
Posted by: PhillyCellphoneSavant | Wednesday, August 30, 2006 at 07:51 PM