Law Commons^™

Congress Does Not Hide Elephants In Mouse-Holes: How Vimeo Paid No Heed To That Caution, Mitch Bailey

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

With the passage of the 1976 Copyright Act, sound recordings fixed prior to February 15, 1972 remained under the protection of the state copyright laws where the works were registered. Some incredible culturally significant songs were fixed before February 15, 1972, including songs from “The Beatles, The Supremes, Elvis Presley, Aretha Franklin, Barbara Streisand, and Marvin Gaye.” To date, state law protects the owner’s rights without interference from federal law, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”).

Given its location, the Second Circuit significantly influenced the development of intellectual property law in the United States, especially copyright law. Many businesses …

Clarifying Uncertainty: Why We Need A Small Claims Copyright Court, John Zuercher

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

This article is concerned with the question of whether copyright law in the United States is currently equipped to achieve its original goal, set within the U.S. Constitution, to promote innovation and progress. This article suggests that copyright law is not equipped to achieve this goal because a paradox inherent in copyright law is hindering copyright litigation and causing uncertainty. The paradox is found in 17 U.S.C. § 106, which protects transformative works that are derivative, and 17 U.S.C. § 107, which protects transformative works as fair use. Ideally, the federal courts would solve this dilemma by interpreting the appropriate …