Edward S. Cullin - Page 15

                                                - 15 -                                                   
                commodity futures trading.  Both at trial and in his post-                               
                trial brief, petitioner attempted to establish a relation-                               
                ship between his commodity trading and his business of                                   
                being a "free lance writer/self-publisher".  As mentioned                                
                above, he argues that he was required to trade commodity                                 
                futures in order "to hedge or solve" "two major copyright                                
                problems [that] happened in 1988."  The first problem was                                
                the fact that the Wall Street Journal changed the format of                              
                its Commodities Page and expanded it to include two lead                                 
                stories.  This change threatened to make obsolete                                        
                petitioner's "mechanical" system of trading commodity                                    
                futures based upon one lead story, and, thereby, to make                                 
                petitioner's manuscript valueless.  The second problem was                               
                the fact that petitioner's promotional literature was                                    
                audited by the NFA.  According to petitioner, he traded                                  
                commodity futures "to document the accuracy of any                                       
                statements" he made in promotional material for his                                      
                manuscript.                                                                              
                      It is not necessary for us to address petitioner's                                 
                argument that there was a direct relationship between his                                
                publishing business and the commodity futures that he                                    
                traded.  Even if we agreed that such a relationship                                      
                existed, we must nevertheless sustain respondent because                                 
                petitioner has failed to show any relationship between the                               
                price or value of his manuscript and the price of the                                    




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011