Law Commons^™

Intellectual Property In Experience, Madhavi Sunder

Michigan Law Review

In today’s economy, consumers demand experiences. From Star Wars to Harry Potter, fans do not just want to watch or read about their favorite characters— they want to be them. They don the robes of Gryffindor, flick their wands, and drink the butterbeer. The owners of fantasy properties understand this, expanding their offerings from light sabers to the Galaxy’s Edge®, the new Disney Star Wars immersive theme park opening in 2019.Since Star Wars, Congress and the courts have abetted what is now a $262 billion-a-year industry in merchandising, fashioning “merchandising rights” appurtenant to copyrights and trademarks that give fantasy owners …

Reinventing Copyright And Patent, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky

Michigan Law Review

Intellectual property systems all over the world are modeled on a one-size-fitsall principle. However important or unimportant, inventions and original works receive the same scope of protection, for the same period of time, backed by the same variety of legal remedies. Essentially, all intellectual property is equal under the law. This equality comes at a heavy price, however. The equality principle gives all creators access to the same remedies, even when those remedies create perverse litigation incentives. Moreover, society overpays for innovation through more monopoly losses than are strictly necessary to incentivize production. In this Article, we propose a solution …

The Audience In Intellectual Property Infringement, Jeanne C. Fromer, Mark A. Lemley

Michigan Law Review

Every intellectual property (“IP”) right has its own definition of infringement. In this Article, we suggest that this diversity of legal rules is largely traceable to differences in the audience in IP cases. Patent, trademark, copyright, and design patent each focus on a different person as the fulcrum for evaluating IP infringement. That patent law, for example, focuses on an expert audience while trademark looks to a consumer audience explains many of the differences in how patent and trademark cases are decided. Expert audiences are likely to evaluate infringement based on the technical similarity between the plaintiff’s and defendant’s works. …

The Case Against Combating Bittorrent Piracy Through Mass John Doe Copyright Infringement Lawsuits, Sean B. Karunaratne

Michigan Law Review

Today, the most popular peer-to-peer file-sharing medium is the BitTorrent protocol. While BitTorrent itself is not illegal, many of its users unlawfully distribute copyrighted works. Some copyright holders enforce their rights by suing numerous infringing BitTorrent users in a single mass lawsuit. Because the copyright holder initially knows the putative defendants only by their IP addresses, it identifies the defendants anonymously in the complaint as John Does. The copyright holder then seeks a federal court's permission to engage in early discovery for the purpose of learning the identities behind the IP addresses. Once the plaintiff knows the identities of the …

Using Public Disclosure As The Vesting Point For Moral Rights Under The Visual Artists Rights Act, Elizabeth M. Bock

Michigan Law Review

In 2010, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit confronted the novel question of when moral rights protections vest under the Visual Artists Rights Act. In Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Foundation, Inc. v. Bichel, the First Circuit determined that the protections of the Visual Artists Rights Act begin when a work is "created" under the Copyright Act. This Note argues that this decision harms moral rights conceptually and is likely to result in unpredictable and inconsistent decisions. This Note proposes instead that these statutory protections should vest when an artist determines that his work is complete and presents …

Innovative Copyright, Greg Lastowka

Michigan Law Review

For over a decade, Michael Carrier has been exploring the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property ("IP") law, contributing many articles that offer new solutions and approaches to the vexing problems confronting the law of innovation. Carrier's academic writing is situated in a voluminous scholarly discourse about the appropriate rules and goals of the laws of copyright, patent, and antitrust. While Carrier easily could have written an "insider" tome for specialists in this area, his new book, Innovation for the 21st Century, is targeted at a broader audience. Carrier's book is directed at legislators, jurists, and opinion makers-as well as …

The Copyright Act Of 1976 And Prejudgment Interest, Jon M. Powers

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that prejudgment interest should be presumptively available on damages-plus-profits awards under section 504(b) but should not be available for statutory damages under section 504(c). Part I argues that Supreme Court precedent suggests that the explicit reference to interest found in the Patent Act does not prevent courts from awarding prejudgment interest under the 1976 Copyright Act. Part II asserts that the 1976 Copyright Act's silence regarding prejudgment interest does not represent a congressional choice to exclude this remedy and that, in the face of this silence, the underlying purposes of section 504 should determine the propriety of …

Rhetoric And Reality In Copyright Law, Stewart E. Sterk

Michigan Law Review

My first objective in this article is to explore the gulf between copyright rhetoric and copyright reality. After examining copyright rhetoric, the article demonstrates how neither the need to generate creative activity nor the desire to reward deserving authors provides a plausible justification for current copyright doctrine.

Why, then, does copyright doctrine continue to expand? The concluding section suggests some answers. Interest-group politics provides an obvious answer and one well-substantiated by the history of copyright legislation. But the story does not end with interest-group politics. Instead, I suggest that the nation's elite, including its lawmakers, has a stake in believing …

Defining Computer Program Parts Under Learned Hand's Abstractions Test In Software Copyright Infringement Cases, John W.L. Ogilive

Michigan Law Review

This Note proposes a set of computer program part definitions that develop Learned Hand's abstractions test to make it more useful in software infringement cases. The Note takes no position on the proper scope of protection for software under copyright law, but argues that no consensus is possible on which program parts deserve copyright protection until courts recognize that computer programs are composed of components whose definition lies beyond judicial control. Program parts defined in conclusory legal terms will never provide a stable basis for reasoned debate over the conclusions presumed in the definitions.

Does A Copyright Coowner's Duty To Account Arise Under Federal Law?, Craig Y. Allison

Michigan Law Review

This Note discusses both the source of the accounting rule and the proper forum for applying the rule. Part I provides a general history of joint ownership and the duty to account and suggests that the number of litigants presenting joint ownership claims will probably increase. Part II discusses joint ownership case law chronologically. This Part shows that the case law is consistent with the view that the duty to account was a creation of the federal courts. Part III argues that the accounting rule is federal common law and that federal jurisdiction necessarily follows for all copyright accounting cases. …

The Nature Of Copyright: A Law Of Users' Rights, Lydia Pallas Loren

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Nature of Copyright: A Law of Users' Rights by L. Ray Patterson and Stanley W. Lindberg

Copyright, Computer Software, And Work Made For Hire, Matthew R. Harris

Michigan Law Review

Prior to the Supreme Court's 1989 decision in Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, the Circuits had disagreed over the question of whether independent contractors could qualify as "employees" under the doctrine. The Fifth, Ninth, and D.C. Circuits defined "employee" narrowly, thereby excluding the majority of commissioned works from potential work for hire status. Applying a much broader definition of the term, the Second and Seventh Circuits included virtually all commissioned works as work for hire. The disagreement was not surprising, since the copyright statute does not include a definition of the term, and the legislative history fails to …

The Availability Of Jury Trials In Copyright Infringement Cases: Limiting The Scope Of The Seventh Amendment, Andrew W. Stumpff

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that statutory copyright damages are properly regarded as equitable and hence that no right to a jury trial exists in cases brought to recover such damages. More generally, the Note maintains that the seventh amendment's distinction between equitable and legal causes of action has produced irrational consequences, and proposes that "legal" issues be defined narrowly so as to limit the scope of the seventh amendment. Part I analyzes the debate over statutory copyright damages, concluding that historical and statutory construction arguments require these damages to be construed as legal. Part II examines some of the problems that …

The Rise Of The Supreme Court Reporter: An Institutional Perspective On Marshall Court Ascendancy, Craig Joyce

Michigan Law Review

This Article will first explore the antecedents to, and beginnings of, the reporter system under Alexander J. Dallas and William Cranch. Next, the Article will examine the transformation of the system under the Court's first official Reporter, the scholarly Henry Wheaton. Finally, the Article will recount the struggle between Wheaton and his more practical successor, Richard Peters, Jr., that culminated in 1834 in the Court's declaration that its decisions are the property of the people of the United States, and not of the Court's Reporters.

Copyright--Protection Denied To Verbal Expression Of Simple Subject Matter--Morrissey V. Proctor & Gamble Co., Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

The plaintiff copyrighted a series of rules for a sales promotional contest in which contestants' social security numbers were used as the basis for a "sweepstakes." In 1959 he submitted the contest rules and game suggestions to several companies, including the defendant Procter & Gamble Company, to see if they were interested in using his scheme. The defendant failed to accept or even to respond to the plaintiff's solicitation. However, three years later Procter & Gamble initiated a "Shopping Fling Sweepstakes" which utilized contestants' social security numbers as the basic element of the game. Plaintiff brought an action for copyright …

Copyright Pre-Emption And Character Values: The Paladin Case As An Extension Of Sears And Compco, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Much of the confusion over copyright pre-emption that has followed in the wake of Sears and Compco may be due to a fundamental difference between the present patent and copyright acts. Unlike the patent law that was at issue in Sears and Compco, the federal Copyright Act provides that the states may in limited circumstances protect literary property through the doctrine of common-law copyright. Under section 2 of the Act, a state may prevent copying of a work so long as it remains "unpublished." An alternative ground of decision in Paladin was that, regardless of preemption under Sears and …

Copyright And Morals, Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

The basis for national copyright legislation in this country is Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution: "The Congress shall have power * * * to 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."

Expensive Futility Of The United States Trade Mark Statute, Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

Every lawyer of much experience knows the client who tip-toes into his office, closes the door carefully, and with a great show of secrecy announces that he has discovered or invented the best name for a soda cracker, a patent medicine, a soft drink, or what not, that human ingenuity ever conceived. He wants it protected before any one can steal it from him. He wants it "Copyrighted." This is the expression most commonly used. He seems to be under the impression that some incantation can be performed by means of which he will be able to secure to himself …

Ingenuity Of The Infringer And The Courts, Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

The person who imitates a trademark has by common consent come to be described as a "pirate." At the time the designation was first applied, it was more or less appropriate. The pirate saw and coveted his neighbor's successful business, and like any MORGAN, TEACH, SHARKEY, or L'OLLONOIS, sighting a fat galleon laden with plate wallowing in the trade winds, homeward bound from the Indies, he laid himself alongside and took what he wanted. He counterfeited marks and labels as exactly as he could, not as he dared. There was no limit to his impudence. He was deterred only by …

Some Historical Matter Concerning Trade-Marks, Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

Most of the text books on the subject of trade marks begin with the case of Southern v. How, and either expressly assert, or by implicating convey the impression that trade marks are a comparatively modern thing, when, as a matter of fact few human institutions can boast a more respectable antiquity. The use of trade marks dates from the very earliest times of which we have any knowledge. The recent excavations in Asia Minor and in Egypt have revealed bricks bearing names which are supposed to be those of the manufacturers accompanied in many instances by devices. Roman bricks …

Unwary Purchaser, Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

Anyone who has occasion to examine the cases involving trade mark infringement and other forms of unfair trading by the imitation of names, labels, packages and the like, must at once be struck by their irreconcilable conflict. While, of course, the facts in no two cases are alike, this diversity cannot account for the variance in result. The rule of law to be applied is not seriously disputed. The Lord Ordinary's definition of infringement, in Smith v. Carron, 13 R. P. C. 109, III, can hardly be improved upon: "A trade mark is infringed when goods are sent into the …

Law Of Dramatic Copyright. Ii., Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

V. Dramatization of novels. - Continued. - Fortunately, we, in the United States, have had very little trouble in regard to the dramatization of novels. The copyright statute provides that the author of a copyrighted book may reserve the right to dramatize and translate his own work. There is no question, however, that but for this act which creates the additional right of dramatization and translation, the English rule would be in force in this country. The exclusive right of translating "Uncle Tom's Cabin" was denied Mrs. Stowe in Stowe v. Thomas, "decided before the enactment of the statute permitting …

The Law Of Dramatic Copyright, Edward S. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

Literary Property at Common Law.--There have been few legal questions so generally and so fully discussed-as that relating to the property of authors in their. writings. Up to 1769, it was generally conceded that authors enjoyed, by virtue of the common law, a perpetual copyright, and copyrights were sold and made the basis of family settlements. In 1769, the great case of Millar v. Taylor, was decided. An action had been brought in 1766 to recover ior the piracy of "Thomson's Seasons," and it was held by a majority of the judges, Lord Mansfield, Mr. Justice Aston and Mr. Justice …