Law Commons^™

Drawing A Line In The Sand: Copyright Law And New Museums, Megan M. Carpenter

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Over the last twenty years, audience attendance at museums, galleries, and performing arts institutions in the United States has decreased dramatically. Major museums and galleries are considering ways to add engaging and meaningful value to the user experience with technology, from incorporating user-generated content to creating multimedia installations billed as "collaborative" works.

In 2010, the Dallas Museum of Art's Coastlines: Images of Land and Sea exhibition featured landscapes from 1850 to the present, as well as a sound installation composed by students and faculty at a local university, which played on speakers throughout the show and responded directly to the …

The Anti-Bootlegging Provisions: Congressional Power And Constitutional Limitations, Craig W. Dallon

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Courts and scholars have considered the constitutional validity of 17 U.S.C. § 1101 (civil), and 18 U.S.C. § 2319A (criminal), known together as "the anti-bootlegging provisions." These provisions prohibit unauthorized recording, copying, and distribution of live musical performances. The provisions have been challenged in three cases, resulting in five published opinions. Two district court opinions held the provisions unconstitutional, but subsequent opinions vacated those decisions. Notwithstanding a sharp division among copyright scholars, the courts have upheld these provisions. The discussion surrounding them is part of a continuing struggle to ascertain limits on congressional power to regulate copying and distribution of …

Copyright In Memoriam, Julie C. Young

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Can a government infringe upon a work dedicated to the memory of its people? The February 2010 Federal Circuit decision "Gaylord v. United States" addresses that question, but any satisfaction from the decision presupposes that the government should be held liable for such an infringement. Consistent with the 1976 Copyright Act, the Gaylord decision preserves the author's rights, paying no regard to the identity of the audience or the infringer. From a policy perspective, however, the result is dubious. Arguably, if a work is a public memorial, and paid for with public funds, it should immediately enter the public domain. …

Cyberspace, Exceptionalism, And Innocent Copyright Infringement, Jacqueline D. Lipton

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Direct copyright infringement attracts strict liability. However, as a theoretical matter, it is not necessarily clear why. Legislatures and courts have typically imposed strict liability where: (a) a defendant has notice of a plaintiff's rights, particularly where those rights involve a property interest; (b) a mens rea requirement on the part of the defendant would create an untenable burden on the plaintiff; (c) it is easier for the defendant to avoid harming the plaintiff than it is for the plaintiff to avoid the harm; or, (d) it is more administratively or economically efficient for the defendant to bear the risk …