Law Commons^™

The Peculiar Case Of State V. Terry Lynn Nichols: Are Television Cameras Really Banned From Oklahoma Criminal Proceedings?, Robert D. Nelon

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The truck bomb ripped into A.P. Murrah Federal Building on April 19, 1995, at 9:02 a.m. One hundred sixty-eight men, women, and children died. None knew Timothy McVeigh or Terry Lynn Nichols, nor did McVeigh and Nichols know them. In fact, Nichols was not even in Oklahoma City when the bombing occurred. He is now--occupying a special cell in the Oklahoma County Jail, awaiting trial on state charges of murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and aiding in placing a bomb near a public building.

Nichols' trip to Oklahoma City was circuitous. Initially, separate federal proceedings against McVeigh and Nichols were …

Irreconcilable Congressional Treatment Of Internet Service Providers As Speakers, Raymond Shih Ray Ku

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article argues that under the CDA and OCILLA, Congress adopted facially inconsistent approaches towards ISP liability for expression. Nonetheless, despite the overt differences, it is possible to discern an underlying principle for determining when ISPs should be considered speakers that reconciles this inconsistency. Put simply, the CDA and OCILLA support an approach toward determining when ISPs are speakers that focuses on whether an ISP exercises editorial control over its network. This approach is evidenced by the fact that both statutes recognize that ISPs are able to exercise editorial control over any and all content on their networks, and both …

For Entertainment Purposes Or Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam: Televangelism In The Marketplace Of Ideas, Juan G. Villasenor

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Note discusses the proposed legal responses to the problem of fraud by televangelists. Finding the solutions constitutionally deficient, politically unsound, or practically ineffective as deterrents, it then explores the possibility of a content-based restriction on televangelists' speech. The Note concludes that such a deliberate restriction on speech cannot withstand First Amendment scrutiny, regardless of the dishonesty or disingenuousness one may find in televangelists' tactics. Accordingly, despite the great potential for deception, televangelists' activities are, and should be, absolutely protected by the First Amendment. Any proposed remedy to deal with televangelism must occur in the marketplace of ideas, which is …

Framing And Blaming In The Culture Wars: Marketing Murder Or Selling Speech?, Clay Calvert

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article uses the Pahler legal battle as a case study to examine the current culture wars that have placed the Hollywood recording and entertainment industries in the legal crosshairs of both legislative and judicial efforts to redefine popular teen culture. The first section demonstrates how the theories at issue in Pahler mirror the tactics used in the recent war against tobacco industry advertising that also allegedly targeted minors. Next, the Article situates Pahler within the context of Congressional hearings in the fall of 2000 that focused attention on the alleged Hollywood marketing of products featuring violent content to minors. …