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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Of Cell Phones And Electronic Mail: Disclosure Of Confidential Information Under Disciplinary Rule 4-101 And Model Rule 1.6, Karin M. Mika Jan 1999

Of Cell Phones And Electronic Mail: Disclosure Of Confidential Information Under Disciplinary Rule 4-101 And Model Rule 1.6, Karin M. Mika

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Regardless of the known security risks, it is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine a law firm in the twentieth century operating without the technological advancements that make it possible to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. These advancements often enable immediate responses that are beneficial to attorneys and clients alike. Cellular phone usage and electronic mail are an integral mode of communication between firm members, negotiating attorneys, as well as between attorneys and their clients. While it has developed into a mode of communication making the practice of law more efficient, it is doubtful that most attorneys give …


Commercial Exploitation Or Protected Use? Stern V. Delphi Internet Services Corporation And The Erosion Of The Right Of Publicity, Karin M. Mika, Aaron J. Reber Jan 1996

Commercial Exploitation Or Protected Use? Stern V. Delphi Internet Services Corporation And The Erosion Of The Right Of Publicity, Karin M. Mika, Aaron J. Reber

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article addresses the repercussions of Stern v. Delphi Internet Services Corporation and argues that the decision in Stern opens the door to a broader interpretation of “newsworthiness” and “public interest” that will enable advertisers broader First Amendment protections when using “unauthorized” likenesses. This article posits that artful advertisers could very well use the theory of Stern as a basis for virtually ensuring that every “unauthorized likeness” will enjoy First Amendment protection and not be considered as violative of the right of publicity.