This is about a book that was not published that would have told about the end of Pan Am. (there actually is another book about the decline of Pan Am, which I read, but a second book can always fill out the story) This comes from the web page of a Senate candidate in Massachusetts, a black man running as a "Reform Republican". Reasoning that Chappiquidick is a personal issue, or maybe out of some more general considerations, he decided to put on his web page a whole report about himself. (he once got a speeding ticket, lost it, forgot abouyt it and was later arrested. He once got himself arrested for drunk driving because his car screeched, and he admitted taking a little wine although the case got dismissed because when he was eventually given a Brethalizer he had .4 was was below the minimum level for being intoxicated in Massachusetts.) In my opinion he apologizes too much. He says that drunk driving laws should be tougher - they really don't ned to be in terms of lowering the alcohol level) He apologizes for not studying enough for the bar exam several times (it was perhaps bad judgement, but the fact is it is well known to be very hard and people are tested on things they did NOT study n law school) And in the ortion I excerpt here, he apologizes for the copyright violation. He wanted to write a whole history of Pan Am. He had no other sources for the early period except a boo copyrighted in 1980. A lot of people had talked to tat author who were now dead. Contrary to what he thought was usual, the previous writer refused to co-operate and let him quote. (if that is comntrary that is a very interesting fact) He warned the publisher. the publisher decided not to publish. hedecided to sue, claiming he had a right under 4 grounds. The judge actually upheld him on one of the grounds but he decided to appeal, in order to create a precedent. THEN He decided the appeals were costing him too much and he gave up the case and agreed not to publish the book. It's not the seeming copyright violation he needs to apologize for - it's for winning the case and then giving it up because he for atime he wanted to make that a test case. In the meantime I don't know what he said about the end of Pan Am. The website is http:\\www.robinson2000.com -------------------------- Here is an excerot from "The Robinson Report" Copyright Case I was always under the impression that one cannot copyright history. Unfortunately, a federal judge in New York didn’t agree with me. In 1992, I wrote a well-received book about the rise and fall of Eastern Airlines. The book was called Freefall: The Needless Destruction of Eastern Airlines and was published by HarperCollins. [SF:I borrowed this book from the library a few times.] Attempting to build on that success, in 1994 I wrote a similar book recounting the rise and fall of Pan Am. It was called American Icarus: The Majestic Rise and Tragic Fall of Pan Am. Unfortunately, the book was never released because it was found to have violated the copyright of the only other history of Pan Am at the time, which was written in 1980. The author of the earlier book on Pan Am had the advantage of being able to interview legendary Pan Am founder Juan Trippe, as well as many other people involved in the founding of the aviation pioneer (such as the immortal Charles Lindbergh). However, the earlier book was obviously an incomplete history because it was written in 1980 and Pan Am didn’t go out of business until the 1990’s. So, my plan was to retell the earlier history and bring the story current through Pan Am’s demise in the mid-1990’s. Unfortunately, I received no help at all from the author of the earlier book. I asked the author and his publisher (Random House) for permission to use his phrasing and descriptive material because, by the time I began writing my history of Pan Am, all of the participants had passed away (except for Charles Lindbergh’s wife, Anne Morrow Lindbergh, whom I believe is a youthful 100 this year). Contrary to the conventional manner in which historians cooperate with each other, the author and Random House refused to give me any permission at all. So, I was left on my own. The problem was that most of the phraseology I was forced to use was necessarily based on statements made by people who were no longer alive. So I had no other source by which to retell the early history of Pan Am other than using the wording and statements found in the earlier book. Upon submission of the manuscript to my publisher, and after alerting my publisher to the copyright issues regarding the earlier book, the publisher decided not to go forward. Remaining determined still, I believed Pan Am’s history, spanning every facet of aviation, was sufficiently important that one author’s intransigence shouldn’t be allowed to stifle the telling of the story for posterity. As such, I brought a copyright lawsuit in New York federal court against the author and Random House, seeking a declaratory judgment that my book on Pan Am didn’t infringe the copyright of the earlier book. The case cite is Robinson v. Random House, 877 F. Supp. 830 (SDNY 1995). My argument was twofold. First, the prodigious use of material from the earlier work was necessary because there was no other source for the statements made by people who had already died. Moreover, the earlier work took substantial material from several of Mrs. Lindbergh’s books that were written in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s. In fact, I argued that is how histories are written. One author builds upon the work of the previous author. My second argument was that the copyright law’s "fair use" doctrine applied to my work. There are 4 factors courts use to decide if the copyright law’s fair use doctrine applies to a subsequent work, and even though the judge decided I won on only 1 of the 4 factors, I still believe all 4 of the factors were in my favor. Based on these factors, I believed the decision was wrong and I appealed the case to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. As my costs mounted and before the case was heard, I decided to end the appeal and settled out of court with Random House without admitting any liability. However, as part of the settlement, I agreed to pay their legal fees of about $40,000, and dismissed my appeal. [He appealed a case he won!!] Although I lost the case, I still believe to this day that I was fighting for a valuable right. Nonetheless, there is a court case that essentially states that I violated the copyright of another author. In that context, I cannot claim that I am proud of such an endeavor. Eastern Airlines I went to work at Eastern Airlines in 1990 when it was already in bankruptcy and was on the brink of liquidation. I came in as part of an emergency management "salvage team" headed by the court-appointed trustee Martin R. Shugrue. [Marty tragically died of a stroke last summer]. I had two jobs: Vice President of Corporate Development at Eastern, where I tried to engineer an Eastern-Pan Am merger that would have saved both airlines; and President of Bar Harbor Airways, Eastern’s wholly-owned regional airline subsidiary. [SF: Marty Shugrue attepted to revive Pan Am and one of his planes, that spent time in the same hanger as TWa Flight 800, had the controls sabotaged in 1977. they told us all not to worry, however, because it was sabotaged in such a way that no pilot would have taken off with the plane that way. Later the new small Pan Am merged with another carrier and changed its name. That small Pan Am could ahve been called Eastern just as well - Martin Shugrue was involved in both. I did not know that he had died. Maybe he belongs on the death list??] When it became clear that Eastern wasn’t going to make it, my partners and I attempted to buy Bar Harbor out of the Eastern bankruptcy estate. Since Eastern was in bankruptcy, Bar Harbor’s stock had to be auctioned off in bankruptcy court. In a bankruptcy auction, anyone can bid: shareholders, creditors, bondholders, management, even a person walking in off the street. It was reported at the time by Business Week, a very fine magazine to which I subscribe, that I was forced to resign from Eastern because I had agreed to "throw in" with one of the bidders. The fact of the matter is that I had no need to "throw in" with anybody because I had financing for my own bid, which I did in fact pursue after resigning from Eastern. The proof in the pudding was that my bid was ultimately accepted by the bankruptcy court. The bad news is that the day after the court approved the deal, Eastern and Bar Harbor suddenly shut down for good, leaving no Bar Harbor to buy. Restraining Order In June 1997, I ended (or so I thought) an "on again, off again" long- distance dating relationship with Jane [Not her real name. Even though some newspapers have reported her real name, I shall not disclose it]. During this time, I was living in Manhattan and Jane was living in Massachusetts. Contrary to some published reports, at no time did Jane and I ever live together. Furthermore, I never visited her home in Massachusetts and, in fact, I do not believe I have ever been to the town where she lives (although I do plan to visit it during the campaign). At all times, and each and every time we met, Jane would voluntarily come to see me at my apartment in Manhattan or visit me during my business trips to Boston and Providence. In June 1997, while visiting me in Manhattan, I informed Jane that I did not wish to see her in the future and that I was breaking off our relationship. I was desirous of ending our relationship for some time and felt that a total break would be best for both of us. However, she refused to accept this state of affairs and instead continued to call me for a period of six months thereafter, attempting to rekindle the relationship. Jane would call me late at night or very early in the morning, weekdays and weekends, most often inquiring as to where I was, whom I was with, and what I was doing. Some of these messages were more distressing to me. I would return her calls every 2-3 weeks (sometimes speaking to her directly, but most times leaving messages) in a desperate attempt to convince her to stop calling me. I was not successful. Late on the evening of Thursday, January 15, 1998, Jane called me at home again. I told her in no uncertain terms that I didn’t want to be contacted by her anymore at all. She quickly became very upset and hung up. A few minutes later, Jane called me back and launched into a verbal assault on me. She stated that she would take out a restraining order against me (although I have never threatened nor intimidated her). She threatened that she would "ruin" me and my reputation. After this harangue, she hung up. I later discovered that the next day, Friday, January 16, 1998, Jane took out an ex parte (without notice to me) restraining order against me. I also later discovered that her affidavit filed in support of the order contained numerous, shocking and absolutely false allegations. For example, Jane claimed that I forced her to engage in sexual relations against her will at one time during our relationship. She also claimed in her affidavit that I used profane, ugly and derogatory language towards her. All of these allegations are absolutely false. (It is rare that I ever swear. I grew up in a household that did not tolerate such language and it remains a good habit that I believe has served me well – and for which I can properly thank my Mother.) The return date for the restraining order was Friday, January 23, 1998, in Attleboro, MA District Court at 9:00 a.m. After driving four hours from New York City in an early morning winter storm, I arrived in court on time. For some reason, Jane (whose town is the next one over from Attleboro), did not show. The Judge called the case and when he noted that Jane had failed to appear, dismissed the case. I then left the courthouse and returned to New York. I later discovered that Jane arrived at the courthouse after I had left and took out another restraining order against me, based on the same affidavit. I was later served with this second order by the New York Police Department at my apartment in New York City. Frustrated with this process, I hired an attorney in Fall River (a well- known attorney named John C. O’Neil). He decided to check my story by subpoenaing Jane’s telephone records from the telephone company. On the day we returned to Attleboro District Court to contest the restraining order, as well as obtain a restraining order protecting me from Jane, the telephone records had arrived at the courthouse. My lawyer and I spent almost 30 minutes going over 6-7 months of telephone records showing Jane’s numerous calls to my home number. When the court convened, my lawyer approached Jane and her representative and showed them the telephone records. Almost immediately, Jane agreed (1) to withdraw the allegations she had made in her affidavit and (2) dismiss the restraining order. But I wanted more. I also wanted some type of agreement by which she would be prevented from contacting me in the future. My lawyer drew up a simple one-page agreement in court that basically said neither party would contact or attempt to contact the other party "forever." The agreement was presented to the Judge. The Judge asked if both Jane and I had signed the agreement freely and without any duress of any kind. Both of us answered in the affirmative. However, the Judge had a problem with approving an agreement that lasted "forever," so he asked us to change the time period of no contact to seven years. My lawyer crossed out the word "forever" and in its place wrote "through the year 2005." Jane and I initialed the change. While not forever, I hoped that seven years would be sufficient. The Judge approved the agreement, all of Jane’s allegations were withdrawn, the restraining order issued against me was vacated and dismissed, and the case was closed. Under Massachusetts law, I had the right to "seal" the file of a case that involved a vacated restraining order. The law also allows me to file a motion to destroy the entire case file. But I didn’t do either. Why? Because I knew that if I ran for public office in the future, more questions would be asked about a sealed or destroyed file than an open file. So, the file remains a public rerecord in Attleboro District Court, which is located at 88 North Main Street, Attleboro, MA 02703. If Jane wants to seal it, I won’t object. But I’m not going to take any action regarding the file. One final note in this regard. This period of time was, I believe, particularly difficult for Jane. It was an unfortunate experience for me to live through and to this day I occasionally reflect on whether there was anything that I could have done to have better resolved and diffused the tension that resulted. I have not found any answers that give me comfort. Finally, though I cannot and do not wish to have any contact with Jane in the future, I have no malice towards her and wish her future success in her life. As a candidate for political office, I am prepared to deal with these difficult issues as best as I am able. Jane, on the other hand, is not running for office. So it is my hope that the media and others will respect her right to privacy. By the way, although I’ve been falsely accused in this matter, I still believe that the domestic abuse prevention laws are important and, if anything, should be strengthened. Because, in the final analysis, while a man’s reputation can ultimately be restored, a woman’s life cannot. $10 Million Lawsuit A company which I represented and in which I had an ownership interest filed a billion-dollar antitrust lawsuit against a wireless communications company that subsequently filed for bankruptcy in Baltimore, Maryland. The wireless company we sued never commenced operations and is in liquidation, but the company didn’t like the fact that I had brought the antitrust lawsuit. They responded by suing me personally for $10 million. I fought the lawsuit and ultimately got it dismissed, but it cost me a lot in terms of time, money and effort. FCC Lawsuit The same wireless company that I represented in the bankruptcy proceedings also participated in an auction for wireless licenses conducted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). My company participated in the auction, won a license, but also withdrew some bids in the final rounds of the auction. Although there were no rules which specifically controlled the situation, the FCC determined that my company was liable for almost $300,000 in bid withdrawal penalties. We protested, particularly since we didn’t believe any penalties were due and, even if they were, that the penalties should be waived. In fact, the FCC has granted waivers in identical circumstances to literally dozens of other bidders, but not to our company. We have taken the FCC to court and the case is scheduled to be heard in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals this fall. [Sounds like he got pubnished like this because he was a Republican] Drugs I have never taken any illegal drugs of any kind whatsoever. I have never used marijuana. Therefore, I have never been in a position to have to say that I didn’t inhale. [He also states that while he was in his teens, he smoked one cigrette. He had a bad reaction to it and thinks it was a good thing]