Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Copyright law (5)
- Fair use (3)
- Infringement (3)
- Copyright (2)
- Dramatic composition (2)
-
- Dramatic copyright (2)
- Dramatization (2)
- Literary composition (2)
- Literary property at common law (2)
- Television (2)
- Unauthorized performance (2)
- Agency theory (1)
- Architectural plan (1)
- Art (1)
- Artists (1)
- CBS (1)
- Columbia Broadcasting System Inc. v. Loew's (1)
- Communications Decency Act (1)
- Consumers (1)
- Copyright Code (1)
- Copyright moderation (1)
- Copyright public law (1)
- Creation (1)
- Design patent (1)
- Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) (1)
- Digital content (1)
- Digital creative expression (1)
- Disclosure (1)
- DuPont (1)
- Experiences (1)
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law
Privatizing Copyright, Xiyin Tang
Privatizing Copyright, Xiyin Tang
Michigan Law Review
Much has been written, and much is understood, about how and why digital platforms regulate free expression on the internet. Much less has been written— and even much less is understood—about how and why digital platforms regulate creative expression on the internet—expression that makes use of others’ copyrighted content. While § 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act regulates user-generated content incorporating copyrighted works, just as § 230 of the Communications Decency Act regulates other user speech on the internet, it is, in fact, rarely used by the largest internet platforms—Facebook and YouTube. Instead, as this Article details, creative speech …
Intellectual Property In Experience, Madhavi Sunder
Intellectual Property In Experience, Madhavi Sunder
Michigan Law Review
In today’s economy, consumers demand experiences. From Star Wars to Harry Potter, fans do not just want to watch or read about their favorite characters— they want to be them. They don the robes of Gryffindor, flick their wands, and drink the butterbeer. The owners of fantasy properties understand this, expanding their offerings from light sabers to the Galaxy’s Edge®, the new Disney Star Wars immersive theme park opening in 2019.Since Star Wars, Congress and the courts have abetted what is now a $262 billion-a-year industry in merchandising, fashioning “merchandising rights” appurtenant to copyrights and trademarks that give fantasy owners …
Using Public Disclosure As The Vesting Point For Moral Rights Under The Visual Artists Rights Act, Elizabeth M. Bock
Using Public Disclosure As The Vesting Point For Moral Rights Under The Visual Artists Rights Act, Elizabeth M. Bock
Michigan Law Review
In 2010, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit confronted the novel question of when moral rights protections vest under the Visual Artists Rights Act. In Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Foundation, Inc. v. Bichel, the First Circuit determined that the protections of the Visual Artists Rights Act begin when a work is "created" under the Copyright Act. This Note argues that this decision harms moral rights conceptually and is likely to result in unpredictable and inconsistent decisions. This Note proposes instead that these statutory protections should vest when an artist determines that his work is complete and presents …
Copyright Pre-Emption And Character Values: The Paladin Case As An Extension Of Sears And Compco, Michigan Law Review
Copyright Pre-Emption And Character Values: The Paladin Case As An Extension Of Sears And Compco, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Much of the confusion over copyright pre-emption that has followed in the wake of Sears and Compco may be due to a fundamental difference between the present patent and copyright acts. Unlike the patent law that was at issue in Sears and Compco, the federal Copyright Act provides that the states may in limited circumstances protect literary property through the doctrine of common-law copyright. Under section 2 of the Act, a state may prevent copying of a work so long as it remains "unpublished." An alternative ground of decision in Paladin was that, regardless of preemption under Sears and …
Television Sponsor And Advertising Agency Held Vicariously Liable For Copyright Infringement--Davis V. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Michigan Law Review
Television Sponsor And Advertising Agency Held Vicariously Liable For Copyright Infringement--Davis V. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
DuPont sponsored a dramatization of Edith Wharton's novel Ethan Frome presented by the CBS television network. Petitioner claimed an infringement of his earlier copyrighted dramatization of the same novel and sought a declaration of liability against CBS, the producer of the program, DuPont, and its advertising agency, Batten, Barton, Durstine & Osborn, Inc. (BBDO). Although DuPont and BBDO were notified before the performance of the possibility of copyright infringement liability and could have stopped the producers from using petitioner's play, they made no attempt to interfere. In petitioner's action in the federal district court, DuPont and BBDO contended that they …
Literary And Artistic Property -- Common-Law Copyright-- Filing Of Architectural Plans In A Public Office As Publication, Judd L. Bacon S.Ed.
Literary And Artistic Property -- Common-Law Copyright-- Filing Of Architectural Plans In A Public Office As Publication, Judd L. Bacon S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff home designer prepared plans for a client and filed a copy in a county office as required by ordinance in order to obtain a building permit. Defendant copied and used these plans without plaintiff's consent. In an action under a state statute codifying the common-law right of designers to the exclusive ownership of their unpublished designs, the lower court held for defendant, finding plaintiff's copyright to have been destroyed by publication. On appeal, held, reversed. The filing of architectural plans in a public office in order to secure a building permit does not constitute a publication of them …
Copryright - Infringement - Parody Of Dramatic Production Held Not To Be Fair Use, William J. Wise S.Ed.
Copryright - Infringement - Parody Of Dramatic Production Held Not To Be Fair Use, William J. Wise S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Prior to December 1938, Patrick Hamilton wrote an original play entitled "Gaslight" which subsequently was published, performed and protected by copyright in both England and the United States. Loew's acquired exclusive motion picture rights to the play on October 7, 1942, and produced an original feature-length motion picture photoplay of the drama, also entitled "Gaslight." In 1945 Jack Benny sought and received permission to produce a 15-minute parody of the motion picture for his radio program. In 1953, without securing Loew's permission, Benny produced a 15-minute filmed parody of the motion picture for his television program. It was entitled "Autolight" …
Borderland - Where Copyright And Design Patent Meet, Richard W. Pogue
Borderland - Where Copyright And Design Patent Meet, Richard W. Pogue
Michigan Law Review
Copyright law and design patent law contemplate basically different objects of protection. Yet at the outer fringes of these types of protection certain concepts overlap to form a rather undefined borderland in which it is difficult to say what law is applicable-copyright law, patent law, neither, or both. It is the purpose of this paper to explore this borderland area in the light of traditional copyright and patent law principles, with attention given to policy considerations involved, and to offer suggestions toward drawing a sharper boundary between the two.
Note And Comment, Gordon W. Stoner, Sigmund W. David, Victor R. Jose Jr.
Note And Comment, Gordon W. Stoner, Sigmund W. David, Victor R. Jose Jr.
Michigan Law Review
The Law School; Pleading Estoppel; Libels on Person and on Property; The Conflict Between a Patentee's Right to Monopoly and a State Anti-Monopoly Statute
Law Of Dramatic Copyright. Ii., Edward S. Rogers
Law Of Dramatic Copyright. Ii., Edward S. Rogers
Michigan Law Review
V. Dramatization of novels. - Continued. - Fortunately, we, in the United States, have had very little trouble in regard to the dramatization of novels. The copyright statute provides that the author of a copyrighted book may reserve the right to dramatize and translate his own work. There is no question, however, that but for this act which creates the additional right of dramatization and translation, the English rule would be in force in this country. The exclusive right of translating "Uncle Tom's Cabin" was denied Mrs. Stowe in Stowe v. Thomas, "decided before the enactment of the statute permitting …
The Law Of Dramatic Copyright, Edward S. Rogers
The Law Of Dramatic Copyright, Edward S. Rogers
Michigan Law Review
Literary Property at Common Law.--There have been few legal questions so generally and so fully discussed-as that relating to the property of authors in their. writings. Up to 1769, it was generally conceded that authors enjoyed, by virtue of the common law, a perpetual copyright, and copyrights were sold and made the basis of family settlements. In 1769, the great case of Millar v. Taylor, was decided. An action had been brought in 1766 to recover ior the piracy of "Thomson's Seasons," and it was held by a majority of the judges, Lord Mansfield, Mr. Justice Aston and Mr. Justice …