Law Commons^™

Google As Copyright Iconoclast, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

Google’s role as a copyright defendant has provided fodder for many an essay in this series, particularly with regard to the Google Books litigation. (Incidentally, that litigation celebrates its tenth anniversary next month – and it’s still going strong.) A more recent Google case, however, is probably just as important, and it provides another interesting lesson in the Internet behemoth’s copyright litigation strategy.

The case is Oracle v. Google. In early 2010, Oracle acquired Sun Microsystems, the developer of Java, the popular cross-platform programming language. Soon thereafter, Oracle sued Google for copyright infringement, alleging that Google’s Android operating system copied …

Trademark Law As An Agency Problem - Part I, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

A few months ago, my IP Issues entry demonstrated that the exclusive rights that trademark law provides are rooted in consumer welfare – in the need to ensure that consumers are able to distinguish one producer’s goods from those of its competitors. In this entry and the next, I will consider the implications of this point for modern trademark law.

If the consumer interest is really what trademark law is all about, then one conundrum that follows is that consumers do not have trademark rights. Producers do. A moment’s reflection explains why: When consumers are deceived by Producer X’s use …

Trademark Law And Consumer Centrality - Part I, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

The conventional wisdom provides two traditional justifications for trademark law. The first is the “consumer protection” rationale. If there were no trademark law, an unknown soft drink manufacturer could freely use Coca-Cola’s COKE trademark on its goods. If it did so, consumers would be defrauded; they would buy the unknown’s products thinking that they were Coca-Cola’s. Trademark law prevents this sort of fraud from occurring and thereby protects consumers from fraud.

The second justification is the “producer incentive” rationale. In the preceding COKE example, it is not just the consumer who is happy that fraud has been prevented. Coca-Cola is …

Transformation, Copyright Infringement, And Fair Use, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

A small copyright decision out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit last month has gotten a big reaction from copyright experts. The case is Kienitz v. Sconnie Nation, and it involves an entertaining set of facts.

In the 1960s, there was a young University of Wisconsin student named Paul Soglin, who had an anti-authoritarian streak. He led a number of demonstrations on issues ranging from civil rights to the Vietnam War. Indeed, one particular Vietnam protest, in May 1969, led to his arrest for failure to obey a police officer. That same protest became an annual …

Cease, Desist, And Laugh, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

Anyone who teaches intellectual property law knows how exciting the subject matter can be for students. They inundate professors not only with questions about the classroom material but also with news about emerging technologies, cutting-edge litigation, and legislative initiatives. And the attentive professor will seek to turn these exchanges into teaching moments.

One favorite of students involves a classic intellectual-property mechanism, the cease-and-desist letter. It’s a favorite, I think, because such correspondence can be over the top, and the responses can be quite funny – making this a perfect topic for this April Fool’s edition of IP Viewpoints. [...]

Small Fry In Copyright Litigation, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In two of my earlier entries in this series, I discussed the results of an empirical study of copyright cases that I have been doing with my colleague Chris Cotropia. One of those entries focused on how hard the parties in copyright lawsuits fightagainst each other, and the other focused on the role of major media companies in copyright litigation.

In this entry, I will continue to talk about the parties that we observed in our study, but instead of discussing major media companies, I will concentrate on the other end of the spectrum: the individual as a party. This …

The Top Three Copyright Cases Of 2012, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In my last entry in this series, I examined three important patent law cases from 2012 – one at the Supreme Court level, one at the appellate level, and one at the trial court level. I’ll now do the same thing with regard to copyright cases.

My Supreme Court choice is Golan v. Holder, in which the Court upheld a statute that restored U.S. copyright protection to certain foreign works, thus removing them from the public domain. Such works had lost their protection – or had never acquired it in the first place – because of their failure to comply …

How Hard-Fought Is Copyright Litigation?, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

As I mentioned in my last essay, my colleague Chris Cotropia and I have recently completed a data collection project in which we examined pleadings from approximately 1,000 copyright cases filed in federal court over a four-year period. We are still evaluating the data, but our preliminary findings indicate that copyright litigation differs from other federal civil litigation; it takes longer and appears to be contested more – yet ends up in much the same place.

A little background first. During the period we studied (2005-2008), the cases fell into three broad categories. The first comprised those cases in which …

Finally, An Answer On Copyright, First Sale, And The Gray Market, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In two past entries in this series, here and here, I discussed whether copyrighted goods manufactured abroad may be resold in the United States without having to get a new license from the copyright owner. When the goods are pirated – manufactured illegally – the answer is clearly no; that’s a classic black-market sale. But when the goods were manufactured abroad with the copyright owner’s consent, well, that’s different. In that case, the resale is what we call a gray-market sale. And there, the answer is less clear.

Or at least it was. But at long last, and after one …

Google Books: Game, Set, But Not Match, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

It’s back: Google Books, our favorite topic in this Intellectual Property Viewpoints series. Google Books is the project through which Google has brought its search capability to the text of more than 20 millions books (with the number still growing). To do so, Google must scan the book and convert the scan to readable text. And there’s the problem: Scanning is copying, and copying raises the question of whether the massive project is a massive violation of the copyrights in all those books. Thus the Authors Guild v. Google class action brought by authors and publishers against Google in a …

Big Media In Copyright Litigation, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

What role does Big Media play in the courtroom?

Major media companies are often portrayed as aggressive drivers of expansive copyright, dominating every aspect of the legal landscape. When it comes to litigation, however, the truth is more nuanced. My colleague Chris Cotropia and I have recently completed a data collection project in which we examined pleadings from approximately 1,000 copyright cases filed over a four-year period (a statistically significant sample). We are still crunching the numbers, but what we’ve learned so far indicates that record labels, film studios, major software companies, and other behemoths of the copyright world end …

Four Ways In Which Kirtsaeng Might Be Undone, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In my previous entry in this series, I discussed the Supreme Court’s long-awaited decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, involving the unauthorized resale in the United States of textbooks purchased overseas. Indeed, the Kirtsaeng case and the issue it presented have been a popular subject of IP Issues commentary; before the Supreme Court ruling, I wrote on the issue here and here, and Randy Picker had some commentary both beforeand after the opinion came down.

You can read those earlier entries for the details, but the outcome of the case is clear: U.S. copyright law does not prohibit …

Copyright And Federal Supremacy, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

The extent of federal power over our lives has been much in the news recently, what with the Supreme Court holding days of hearings on whether the Affordable Care Act is an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. Like the ACA, copyright regulation is federal, but it derives its constitutional authority from a different part of the Constitution, known as the Patent and Copyright Clause, which gives Congress the power “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” …

Trademark Tension, Part Ii, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In the previous entry in this series, I discussed the narrow foundations of trademark law and its more recent expansion – in particular, how new approaches to trademark liability have departed from the law’s traditional focus on disputes about the source of competing goods. I continue that theme now by considering a tension that emerges from this expansion. Although trademark liability has expanded beyond source-identification, other aspects of trademark law have not, and these more traditional aspects can rise up and trap the unwary mark owner, or at least turn its expanded rights into expanded costs.

To understand the tension …

The Top Three Patent Cases Of 2012, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

New Year’s Day prompts us to reflect on what the last 12 months have brought, so I’ve taken the opportunity to think back on 2012’s intellectual property developments. It’s been a busy year, with patent reform, new technologies, multilateral treaties, and more. To make my task more manageable, I’m going to focus on three important patent law cases – one at the Supreme Court level, one at the appellate level, and one at the trial court level. I’ll conclude with an extra-special bonus: the Case To Watch for patent law in 2013. Then, in my next entry in this series, …

Google Books: Finally, An Actual Fair Use Ruling!, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

One of our favorite topics in this Intellectual Property Issues series – perhaps the favorite – is Google Books, the massive project through which Google hopes to bring its search capability to the text of all books in the English language. To make a book’s text searchable, however, Google must scan the book. And scanning is copying. And copying usually means copyright infringement. Certainly the many authors and publishers who have sued Google take this view.

There are two ways to avoid infringement when copying a copyrighted book: get a license or prove that the copying constitutes fair use. Many …

Apple V. Samsung: A Primer, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

The jury verdict in the Apple v. Samsung case is in, and it is a whopper: $1.05 billion in damages, to be paid by Samsung to Apple for violating various intellectual property rights in the iPhone and iPad. In all likelihood, the court will follow that up with an order banning several Samsung products from the U.S. marketplace. So what is this case all about?

What Are Apple’s Claims?

Apple had several different theories of infringement here, and the jury bought almost all of them, at least with regard to certain Samsung devices. Here are the theories that won Apple …

Copyright's Gray Market, Redux, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In an earlier entry in this series, I discussed an important issue in copyright law – whether the first sale doctrine applies to goods manufactured abroad. The Supreme Court was set to decide the issue in Costco v. Omega, but the Court split 4-4 and so left the matter unresolved.

Now the issue is back before the Supreme Court, in a case for which certiorari was granted this month: Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons. Supap Kirtsaeng is a native of Thailand who moved to the United States to attend college. To subsidize his tuition, he began importing textbooks that …

Trademark Tension, Part I, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In this Intellectual Property Viewpoints series, we tend to focus on copyright and patent law – the “big two” IP regimes that govern innovation in the arts and sciences. But there is a third IP regime, a cousin to copyright and patent, which is important to almost any enterprise, even if its business has nothing to do with innovation. That’s trademark law.

Over the last several decades, trademark law has grown from its modest roots and experienced an expansion that rivals that of its more high-profile cousins. In this essay and the next, I will discuss this phenomenon, and in …

Notice And Takedown, Here And Abroad, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has been around for more than a dozen years now. Some of its provisions were just weird, such as the one that established sui generis protection for boat hull designs. Others have had a skeptical reception in the courts, like the anti-circumvention provisions that forbid certain forms of hacking through technological protections for copyrighted works.

But one DMCA provision that has proved popular in both the copyright community and the courts is the notice-and-takedown procedure codified at 17 U.S.C. § 512(c). When a copyright owner finds that some Internet user has illegally posted its copyrighted …

Will You Go To Jail For Copyright Infringement?, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

We’ve all seen it. Stick a movie in the DVD player, and up pops a scary message from law enforcement: if you infringe copyright, the feds will come after you. Indeed, this threat is so ubiquitous that it has worked its way into popular perception; as any copyright expert knows from cocktail party conversations, laypeople seem to view copyright infringement as mostly a criminal matter.

It’s certainly possible to go to jail for violating copyright law, as long as the violation is willful and involves specific kinds or amounts of infringement. And the good news for copyright owners is that …

Contracting Away Copyright Privileges, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In copyright class, professors usually spend most of their time explaining the “public law” aspects of copyright – the exclusive rights that the law gives copyright holders (e.g., reproduction and public performance) and the privileges that the law gives to those who use copyrighted goods (e.g., fair use and first sale). But as they and their students know, many everyday encounters with copyrighted goods are governed not by this public law, but by the “private law” that sellers and buyers create through contracts.

Software provides the best example. If you somehow managed to legally purchase and install a computer program …

The Dmca And Repeat Infringers, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

The recent agreement between big media companies and big Internet service providers (ISPs) concerning online copyright infringement has the law and technology world abuzz. ISPs like Comcast, Verizon, and Time Warner Cable have agreed to implement a system under which subscribers who repeatedly and illegally download copyrighted content will have their Internet access impeded and maybe even terminated.

This is big news, and it will probably receive more attention in this IP Viewpoints series. But the purpose of this column is to put this agreement in context, because much of what the companies have agreed to do appears to be …

Gray-Market Goods And Copyright's Gray Area, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

Copyright law generally gives authors no control over the aftermarket for their goods. Suppose I write a book, and I sell you a copy of it. You are free to resell the book, or lend it to a friend, or give it away. That’s because as long as your copy is “lawfully made under this title” (that is, made with my authorization under U.S. law), then copyright has nothing to say about its further distribution – who owns it, who sells it to whom, etc.

This notion is known as the first sale doctrine. It is so named because at …

The Rebirth Of Copyright As An Opt-In System?, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

For most of the history of Anglo-American copyright law, copyright was an opt-in system: Authors had to jump through certain regulatory hoops if they wanted to prevent others from copying their works without consent. These threshold formalities included registering their works with a government agency, affixing a notice to published copies, depositing exemplars with a centralized library, and more. A failure to comply with the requirements usually meant a diminution in the authors’ copyright entitlement – and in some cases a wholesale forfeiture, under which the works would pass immediately into the public domain.

After some 200 years, however, U.S. …

Viacom V. Youtube: A Different View On The District Court Ruling, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In an earlier essay in this series, Randy Picker discussed the recent copyright decision in Viacom v. YouTube, and in particular the court’s ruling that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s “safe harbor” for remote storage applies to YouTube’s online video service. I agree with Randy that the court’s interpretation of the DMCA is problematic, but I see a good argument that the outcome is correct and that the ruling should be affirmed on appeal.

Viacom v. YouTube is a hugely important case. It pits the world’s fourth-biggest media company against Internet behemoth Google, which purchased YouTube in 2006 for $1.65 …

Copyright As Censorship - Part Ii, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

2010 marks the 300th anniversary of the Statute of Anne, the English legislation that ushered in the modern era of copyright law. The Statute of Anne is celebrated for a number of reasons, and perhaps foremost among them is its rejection of copyright as an instrument of censorship. In a previous essay in this series, I discussed one way in which copyright law historically acted as an instrument of censorship: its refusal to grant protection to works that courts judged immoral. In this essay, I discuss copyright’s role in facilitating a different kind of censorship: lawsuits in which a copyright …

Reproduction, Distribution, And "Making Available", James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

When an individual makes a music or movie file available for downloading by others, without the permission of the copyright owner, is that an infringing act? Or does infringement take place only when the file is actually downloaded?

This thorny copyright issue is at the heart of much of the controversy over file-sharing. It’s relatively simple for a copyright owner to prove that a file has been made available for download, but it’s much harder to prove that a download has actually occurred. So if liability attaches to the mere act of “making available,” record labels and movie studios will …

Who's Afraid Of The Berne Convention?, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

A few months ago, I wrote an essay for this series that argued for reinstatement of formalities as a prerequisite to copyright protection. I left unaddressed one of the main objections to such a system: the fact that international law is unfriendly to formalities. I address that objection here.

The most pertinent international law is the Berne Convention, a multilateral treaty that dates to the 1800s. Since 1908, Article 5(2) of the treaty has prevented any signatory nation from requiring formalities such as registration and notice as a condition of copyright protection. It was the United States’ accession to the …

Formalities And Tiered Copyright Protection, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

In my last IP Issues entry, I discussed the advantages of reinstating formalities as prerequisites to copyright protection. In this entry, I will suggest one way in which this reinstatement might take place.

For most of modern copyright law’s existence, a work of expression received copyright protection only if the author complied with several formalities, such as registering the work with a government agency and placing a copyright notice on each copy of the work (the ubiquitous C-in-a-circle).

These formalities served two functions. The first is what I call the “threshold” function: They gave the author a chance to demonstrate …