Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Free Speech, First Amendment, And New Media For Cons And Festivals" From Pop Culture Business Handbook For Cons And Festivals, Jon Garon
Faculty Scholarship
This article is part of a series of book excerpts from The Pop Culture Business Handbook for Cons and Festivals, which provides the business, strategy, and legal reference guide for fan conventions, film festivals, musical festivals, and cultural events.Although most events are organized by private parties, the location of these events in public venues and the crowd management issues involving free speech make First Amendment and free speech issues a critical component of event management. This excerpt provides a framework for understanding the legal and security issues involving free speech at public events.
Authorship, Disrupted: Ai Authors In Copyright And First Amendment Law, Margot E. Kaminski
Authorship, Disrupted: Ai Authors In Copyright And First Amendment Law, Margot E. Kaminski
Publications
Technology is often characterized as an outside force, with essential qualities, acting on the law. But the law, through both doctrine and theory, constructs the meaning of the technology it encounters. A particular feature of a particular technology disrupts the law only because the law has been structured in a way that makes that feature relevant. The law, in other words, plays a significant role in shaping its own disruption. This Essay is a study of how a particular technology, artificial intelligence, is framed by both copyright law and the First Amendment. How the algorithmic author is framed by these …
Beyond Trademarks And Offense: Tam And The Justices’ Evolution On Free Speech, Clay Calvert
Beyond Trademarks And Offense: Tam And The Justices’ Evolution On Free Speech, Clay Calvert
UF Law Faculty Publications
In Matal v. Tam , the Supreme Court threw out the “disparagement clause” of the Lanham Act, the federal trademark law, because trademarks are private speech and thus regulating them based on government determinations of offensiveness violates the First Amendment. The solid outcome here contrasts with the narrow, incremental results in some other recent First Amendment cases that reached the Court.