Law Commons^™

Copyright And Underwater Cultural Heritage, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

This article will focus on three aspects of copyright law as it applies to the photography of underwater cultural heritage. First, to what extent can a salvor claim exclusive rights to photograph a particular site? Second, who is the author (or who are the authors) of such underwater photography, which increasingly involves the use of remote-controlled robotic drones? Third, to what extent can a State control the use of underwater photography that falls within its territorial waters?8 All three of these aspects have been the subject of lawsuits and judicial opinions in the United States; and those opinions shed light …

Emojis And The Law, Eric Goldman

Faculty Publications

Emojis are an increasingly important way we express ourselves. Though emojis may be cute and fun, their usage can lead to misunderstandings with significant legal stakes—such as whether someone should be obligated by contract, liable for sexual harassment, or sent to jail.

Our legal system has substantial experience interpreting new forms of content, so it should be equipped to handle emojis. Nevertheless, some special attributes of emojis create extra interpretative challenges. This Article identifies those attributes and proposes how courts should handle them.

One particularly troublesome interpretative challenge arises from the different ways platforms depict emojis that are nominally standardized …

Brief Of Amici Curiae - Copyright And Intellectual Property Law Professors In Support Of Defendant-Petitioner Pandora Media, Inc., Tyler T. Ochoa, Joseph C. Gratz

Faculty Publications

Brief submitted to the Supreme Court of the State of California.

Case No. S240649 FLO & EDDIE, INC., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PANDORA MEDIA, INC., Defendant-Petitioner.

Plaintiff Flo & Eddie, Inc., contends that the phrase “exclusive ownership” in California Civil Code section 980 includes all possible uses to which a copyrightable work may be put, including an exclusive right of public performance. At the time California Civil Code section 980 was first enacted in 1872, however, the phrase “exclusive ownership” in relation to a copyrightable work meant something different and much narrower: namely, the right of first publication (reproduction and sale) only. …

Dr. Seuss, The Juice And Fair Use Revisited: Two Decades Of Parody And Satire In Copyright Law, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

This essay will summarize some of the salient features and arguments made in the original article. It will also analyze copyright infringement cases in the last 20 years applying the fair use doctrine to parody and satire.

Licensing & Law Who Owns An Avatar?, Tyler T. Ochoa, Jaime Banks

Faculty Publications

Both players and game developers have great influence over how avatars—via their assembled components— manifest in digital game play. Developers craft their foundational platforms and draw on those infrastructures to craft dynamic code that enables movements, appearances, and abilities. But those potentials call into question whether avatars are avatars until they are played—players click avatars into being, customize their bodies and attire, drive their actions and interactions, and sometimes bring them outside the game world through physical representations. So, given avatars’ joint reliance on developers and players, and given legal frameworks such as copyright law, who really “owns” a video …

Reach Out And Touch Someone: Reflections On The 25th Anniversary Of Feist Publications, Inc. V. Rural Telephone Service Co., Tyler T. Ochoa, Craig Joyce

Faculty Publications

2016 marks the 25th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., one of the Court’s landmark opinions in copyright law, and one that continues to define the standard of originality for copyrighted works in general and compilations of data in particular. The Feist case, however, was an unlikely candidate for landmark status. Only a handful of court opinions and academic authors had expressed dissatisfaction with the existing state of the law concerning originality and data compilations.scure sources which have enhanced greatly the pages that follow. Further, the Tenth Circuit’s opinion in Feist …

What Is A "Useful Article" In Copyright Law After Star Athletica?, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

In Star Athletica, LLC v, Varsity Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court decided the appropriate test to determine when a feature of a useful article is protectable under §101 of the Copyright Act. However, there is an antecedent question that must be answered first before the Supreme Court's two part test in Star Athetica may be invoked.

Protection For Works Of Foreign Origin Under The 1909 Copyright Act, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

One of the principal goals of the 1909 Copyright Act was to simplify and streamline the formalities required to obtain copyright protection. Before the 1909 Copyright Act, authors had to register their works before publication in order to be eligible for copyright protection; and notice of the registration had to be included on all copies published in the United States. If a work was published anywhere in the world before registration, or if the notice was omitted when the work was published domestically, the work went into the public domain. Under the 1909 Act, however, authors only had to publish …

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 28 - Email From Christopher Klipple, Christopher Klipple

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 21 - Email From Christina Aguilar, Christina Aguilar

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Copyright, Derivative Works And Fixation: Is Galoob A Mirage, Or Does The Form (Gen) Of The Alleged Derivative Work Matter?, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

The Copyright Act gives a copyright owner the exclusive right "to prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work." Does the Copyright Act require that a derivative work be "fixed in a tangible medium of expression" in order to be infringing? Existing case law is contradictory, stating both that a derivative work does not need to be "fixed" but that it does need to be embodied in some "concrete or permanent form." This contradiction stems from the fact that although the statutory language does not appear to require fixation, reading the statutory language literally would render illegal merely imagining a …

Introduction: Rights Of Attribution, Section 43(A) Of The Lanham Act, And The Copyright Public Domain, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

In Dastar Corporation v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether the former owner of the copyright in a "work made for hire" has a federal right of attribution that continues to exist even after the formerly copyrighted work has entered the public domain.

Fifteen intellectual property law professors filed anamicus brief in the case in support of the Petitioner. The brief, which is reprinted following this introduction, attempts to place the Dastar case in its historical context, as merely the latest effort on the part of former copyright owners to use trademark and unfair …