Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law

Muddy Waters: Fair Use Implications Of Google V. Oracle America, Inc., Gary Myers Feb 2022

Muddy Waters: Fair Use Implications Of Google V. Oracle America, Inc., Gary Myers

Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court ruling in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. ended a long-running dispute between two giant technology companies. The case, which first began in 2010, has received considerable attention and commentary with regard to the scope of copyright protection for software and then about the contours of the fair use defense. The Court ultimately left the software copyright questions for another day, but it did render an important decision on fair use, the first major precedent on this important topic since 1994.

The Court’s fair use ruling provides important guidance on the scope of fair use …


Tried And True: Fair Use Tales For The Telling, Sarah E. Mccleskey, Courtney Selby Mar 2019

Tried And True: Fair Use Tales For The Telling, Sarah E. Mccleskey, Courtney Selby

Faculty Publications

On Thursday, March 1, 2018, the Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication hosted “Tried and True: Fair Use Tales for the Telling,” a one-day program celebrating Harvard’s Fifth Anniversary of Fair Use Week. Leading fair use scholars and practitioners shared their stories and engaged in lively discussion about the powerful and flexible fair use provision of the Copyright Act and its applications. Topics included treatment of the fair use doctrine in recent jurisprudence, conflicts over the use of visual works in remixes and mash-ups, academic work and social commentary, filmmaking, controlled digital lending practices in libraries, software preservation, and more. …


Intent In Fair Use, Eva E. Subotnik Jan 2014

Intent In Fair Use, Eva E. Subotnik

Faculty Publications

This Article explores the role of intent in the context of fair use. Specifically, it examines whether a claim of fair use of a copyrighted work should be assessed solely from an “objectively reasonable” vantage point or should, additionally, allow for evidence from the subjective perspective of the user. Courts and scholars have largely sided with the former view but have failed to explain fully why this should be the case or whether there might be countervailing benefits to considering evidence of subjective intent. Crucially overlooked is the possibility that taking the user’s perspective into account would serve copyright’s utilitarian …


The Forgotten Right Of Fair Use, Ned Snow Jan 2011

The Forgotten Right Of Fair Use, Ned Snow

Faculty Publications

Free speech was once an integral part of copyright law; today it is all but forgotten. At common law, principles of free speech protected those who expressed themselves by using another's expression. Free speech determined whether speakers had infringed a copyright. To prevail on a copyright claim, then, a copyright holder would need to prove that the speaker’s use fell outside the scope of permissible speech - or in other words, that the use was not fair. Where uncertainty prevented that proof, fair use would protect speakers from the suppression of copyright. Today, however, all this has changed. Copyright has …


Fair Use As A Matter Of Law, Ned Snow Jan 2011

Fair Use As A Matter Of Law, Ned Snow

Faculty Publications

Courts have recently abandoned the centuries-old practice of construing fair use as an issue of fact for the jury. Fair use now stands as an issue of law for the judge. This change is threatening traditional contours of copyright law that protect fair-use speech. Courts, then, must reform their current construction of fair use by returning to its origins— fair use as a factual matter for the jury. Yet even if courts do construe fair use as a matter of fact, the question remains whether courts should ever decide fair use as a matter of law. To answer this question, …


Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech, Ned Snow Apr 2010

Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech, Ned Snow

Faculty Publications

Courts have created a burden of proof in copyright that chills protected speech. The doctrine of fair use purports to ensure that copyright law does not trample rights of speakers whose expression employs copyrighted material. Yet those speakers face a burden of proof that weighs heavily in the fair use analysis, where factual inquiries are often subjective and speculative. Failure to satisfy the burden means severe penalties, which prospect quickly chills the free exercise of speech that constitutes a fair use. The fair-use burden of proof is repugnant to the fair use purpose. Today, copyright holders are exploiting the burden …


Global Warming Trend? The Creeping Indulgence Of Fair Use In International Copyright Law, Richard J. Peltz-Steele Jan 2009

Global Warming Trend? The Creeping Indulgence Of Fair Use In International Copyright Law, Richard J. Peltz-Steele

Faculty Publications

In her article Toward an International Fair Use Doctrine in 2000, Professor Ruth Okediji hypothesized that the internationalization of copyright law would threaten the freedom of expression if some doctrine akin to U.S. “fair use” were not established as an international legal norm. Acknowledging the central concern of the Okediji article, this paper analyzes research and legal developments since that article to determine how the present state of the “fair use” concept in international copyright law differs from its state in 2000. The paper concludes that in the last eight years, though there has been no formal adoption of an …


Intellectual Property Rights In An Attorney’S Work Product, Ralph D. Clifford Jan 2008

Intellectual Property Rights In An Attorney’S Work Product, Ralph D. Clifford

Faculty Publications

This paper addresses the main intellectual property consequences of practicing law and whether attorneys can prevent others from using their work-product. The article does not assume that the reader is an expert in intellectual property law; instead, it is designed to answer the types of questions practitioners have about their rights.