Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment (2)
- Art (1)
- Commercial exploitation (1)
- Confederacy (1)
- Counterspeech doctrine (1)
-
- Cultural heritage (1)
- Domestic dissemination ban (1)
- Endorsement (1)
- Entertainment law (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Government speech (1)
- Intellectual property (1)
- Law (1)
- Merchandise (1)
- Personalized algorithms (1)
- Personalized speech (1)
- Propaganda (1)
- Public art (1)
- Right to publicity (1)
- Smith–Mundt Act (1)
- Social media (1)
- Technology law (1)
- User personalization (1)
- Video games (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law
Video Games And The First Amendment, Eli Pales
Video Games And The First Amendment, Eli Pales
Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property
The video game industry is massive, with an annual revenue of $180 billion worldwide; $60 billion of that in America alone. For context, the industry’s size is greater than that of the movie, book, and music industries combined. Yet, despite this market dominance, the video game industry is relatively new. Only in the 2011 decision of Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association did the Supreme Court extend First Amendment protection to games. Still, the Court failed to define the scope of the game medium. As understood by an average person, a video game could be something as simple as Pac-Man or …
Countering Personalized Speech, Leon G. Ho
Countering Personalized Speech, Leon G. Ho
Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property
Social media platforms use personalization algorithms to make content curation decisions for each end user. These personalized recommendation decisions are essentially speech conveying a platform's predictions on content relevance for each end user. Yet, they are causing some of the worst problems on the internet. First, they facilitate the precipitous spread of mis- and disinformation by exploiting the very same biases and insecurities that drive end user engagement with such content. Second, they exacerbate social media addiction and related mental health harms by leveraging users' affective needs to drive engagement to greater and greater heights. Lastly, they erode end user …
Long-Term Preservation Of Public Art: From Cultural Heritage To The Confederacy, Maliha Ikram
Long-Term Preservation Of Public Art: From Cultural Heritage To The Confederacy, Maliha Ikram
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
Disentangling The Right Of Publicity, Eric E. Johnson
Disentangling The Right Of Publicity, Eric E. Johnson
Northwestern University Law Review
Despite the increasing importance attached to the right of publicity, its doctrinal scope has yet to be clearly articulated. The right of publicity supposedly allows a cause of action for the commercial exploitation of a person’s name, voice, or image. The inconvenient reality, however, is that only a tiny fraction of such instances are truly actionable. This Article tackles the mismatch between the blackletter doctrine and the shape of the case law, and it aims to elucidate, in straightforward terms, what the right of publicity actually is.
This Article explains how, in the absence of a clear enunciation of its …
Apple Pie Propaganda? The Smith–Mundt Act Before And After The Repeal Of The Domestic Dissemination Ban, Weston R. Sager
Apple Pie Propaganda? The Smith–Mundt Act Before And After The Repeal Of The Domestic Dissemination Ban, Weston R. Sager
Northwestern University Law Review
For over sixty years, the Smith–Mundt Act prohibited the U.S. Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) from disseminating government-produced programming within the United States over fears that these agencies would “propagandize” the American people. However, in 2013, Congress abolished the domestic dissemination ban, which has led to a heated debate about the role of the federal government in free public discourse. Although the 2013 repeal of the domestic dissemination ban promotes greater government transparency and may help counter anti-American sentiment at home, it also gives the federal government great power to covertly influence public opinion. To …