Law Commons^™

Aereo, In-Line Linking, And A New Approach To Copyright Infringement For Emerging Technologies, Shannon Mcgovern

Catholic University Law Review

In an ever-changing technological landscape, strictly adhering to the language and definitions of the Copyright Act in cases involving emerging technologies may contravene the purpose and intent of copyright law. However, the Supreme Court’s 2014 opinion in American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo Inc. puts forth a commercial interest rationale that suggests copyright infringers may no longer be able to avoid liability based on perceived technological loopholes that have typically absolved online infringers of infringement liability. This Note argues that Aereo’s commercial interest rationale paves the way for a new approach to technologically complex copyright cases, particularly where in-line linking …

Anarchy, Status Updates, And Utopia, James Grimmelmann

Pace Law Review

Social software has a power problem. Actually, it has two. The first is technical. Unlike the rule of law, the rule of software is simple and brutal: whoever controls the software makes the rules. And if power corrupts, then automatic power corrupts automatically. Facebook can drop you down the memory hole; PayPal can garnish your pay. These sovereigns of software have absolute and dictatorial control over their domains.

Is it possible to create online spaces without technical power? It is not, because of social software’s second power problem. Behind technical power, there is also social power. Whenever people come together …

Expired Patents, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Catholic University Law Review

This article presents a comprehensive empirical description of the public domain of technologies that have recently passed out of patent protection. From a new dataset of over 300,000 patents that expired during 2008–2012, the study examines technological, geographical, and procedural traits of newly public inventions as a basis for exploring the social value associated with their competitive use. Moreover, comparing these inventions to inventions newly patented during the same period enables more specific discussion of how the balance of innovation in the United States continues to change.

Silent Similarity, Jessica D. Litman

Articles

From 1909 to 1930, U.S. courts grappled with claims by authors of prose works claiming that works in a new art form—silent movies—had infringed their copyrights. These cases laid the groundwork for much of modern copyright law, from their broad expansion of the reproduction right, to their puzzled grappling with the question how to compare works in dissimilar media, to their confusion over what sort of evidence should be relevant to show copyrightability, copying and infringement. Some of those cases—in particular, Nichols v. Universal Pictures—are canonical today. They are not, however, well-understood. In particular, the problem at the heart of …

Internet Freedom With Teeth, Charles Duan

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

"You make the very salient statement that we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that this is a case about teeth. Well, Markman was a case about dry cleaning. But nobody thinks of Markman as standing for anything about dry cleaning."

So went what was Chief Judge Prost's perhaps most striking question to the attorney for the International Trade Commission at oral argument in ClearCorrect Operating, LLC v. International Trade Commission, which is the focus of Professor Sapna Kumar's recent article Regulating Digital Trade. Yet this is what remains so fascinating about ClearCorrect: an administrative agency decision about idiosyncratic facts …

Copyright's Technological Interdependencies, Clark D. Asay

Faculty Scholarship

Copyright was initially conceptualized as a means to free creative parties from dependency on public and private patrons such as monarchs, churches, and well-to-do private citizens. By achieving independence for creative parties, the theory ran, copyright led to greater production of a more diverse set of creative works.

But this lingering conception of copyright is both inaccurate and harmful. It is inaccurate because, in today’s world, creative parties are increasingly dependent upon “Technological Patronage” from the likes of Google, Amazon, Apple, and others. Thus, rather than being alternatives or adversaries, copyright and Technological Patronage are increasingly interdependent in facilitating both …

Campbell At 21/Sony At 31, Jessica D. Litman

Articles

When copyright lawyers gather to discuss fair use, the most common refrain is its alarming expansion. Their distress about fair use’s enlarged footprint seems completely untethered from any appreciation of the remarkable increase in exclusive copyright rights. In the nearly forty years since Congress enacted the 1976 copyright act, the rights of copyright owners have expanded markedly. Copyright owners’ demands for further expansion continue unabated. Meanwhile, they raise strident objections to proposals to add new privileges and exceptions to the statute to shelter non-infringing uses that might be implicated by their expanded rights. Copyright owners have used the resulting uncertainty …

Commercial Speech, Commercial Use, And The Intellectual Property Quagmire, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

The commercial speech doctrine in First Amendment jurisprudence has frequently been criticized and is recognized as a highly contested, problematic and shifting landscape. Despite the compelling critique within constitutional law scholarship more broadly, Intellectual Property (“IP”) law has not only embraced the differential treatment of commercial speech, but has done so in ways that disfavor a much broader swath of speech than traditional commercial speech doctrine allows. One of the challenges for courts, litigants, and scholars alike is that the term “commercial” is used to mean multiple things, even within the same body of IP law. In this Article, I …

The Crispr Revolution: What Editing Human Dna Reveals About The Patent System’S Dna, Robin C. Feldman

Robin C Feldman