Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Designing Dupes: A Legislative Proposal For Holding Online Marketplaces Contributorily Liable For Counterfeit Goods, Gina Boone
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
With a simple click on your favorite online marketplace, any consumer can unknowingly buy counterfeit goods. Counterfeits are no longer limited to fake luxury bags on the streets of Chinatown. These dupes can be roller skates, children’s toys, and even car tires. However, counterfeit products’ impact reaches far beyond just consumer health and safety. Counterfeiting negatively affects small businesses, imposes financial burdens, and causes reputational damage. Online marketplaces are aware of the increase of counterfeit products on their websites. Yet, they continue to facilitate its growth because it is unlikely the online platforms will be held liable for the sale …
The Regulation Of Cryptocurrencies: Between A Currency And A Financial Product, Hadar Y. Jabotinsky Dr.
The Regulation Of Cryptocurrencies: Between A Currency And A Financial Product, Hadar Y. Jabotinsky Dr.
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
Cryptocurrencies are electronically generated and stored currencies by which users can trade either real or virtual objects with one another. As these digital assets gain popularity, the issue of how to regulate them becomes more pressing. Cryptocurrencies are attractive due in part to their decentralized, peer-to-peer structure. This makes them an alternative to national currencies which are controlled by central banks. Given that these cryptocurrencies are already replacing some of the “regular” national currencies and financial products, the question then arises—should they be regulated? And if so, how? This paper draws the legal distinction between cryptocurrencies which are in fact …
The Dtsa’S Federalism Problem: Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Trade Secrets, Conor Tucker
The Dtsa’S Federalism Problem: Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Trade Secrets, Conor Tucker
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (“DTSA”) greatly expanded federal protection of trade secrets. But how many trade secrets were “federalized”? The short answer is: many, but not all. At the heart of the DTSA lies a mammoth jurisdictional problem: Congress only federalized certain trade secrets. Unlike copyrights and patents, Congress has no independent constitutional basis to regulate trade secrets. Instead, like trademarks, trade secrets are regulated under the commerce clause and must satisfy a jurisdictional element, which requires a nexus between interstate commerce and trade secrets. But unlike trademarks, Congress chose not to legislate to the fullest extent …
Patent Fences And Constitutional Fence Posts: Property Barriers To Pharmaceutical Importation, Daniel R. Cahoy
Patent Fences And Constitutional Fence Posts: Property Barriers To Pharmaceutical Importation, Daniel R. Cahoy
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Patent Fences And Constitutional Fence Posts: Property Barriers To Pharmaceutical Importation, Daniel R. Cahoy
Patent Fences And Constitutional Fence Posts: Property Barriers To Pharmaceutical Importation, Daniel R. Cahoy
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Privacy Versus The First Amendment: A Skeptical Approach, Solveig Singleton
Privacy Versus The First Amendment: A Skeptical Approach, Solveig Singleton
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Keynote Address: Commons And Code, Lawrence Lessig
Keynote Address: Commons And Code, Lawrence Lessig
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Panel Ii: Cable Versus Broadcast Tv: The “Must Carry” Provisions Of The Cable Television Consumer And Competition Act Of 1992, Marc Apfelbaum, Gregory Buscarino, Steven J. Hyman, Robert D. Joffe
Panel Ii: Cable Versus Broadcast Tv: The “Must Carry” Provisions Of The Cable Television Consumer And Competition Act Of 1992, Marc Apfelbaum, Gregory Buscarino, Steven J. Hyman, Robert D. Joffe
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Panel Iv: Censorship Of Cable Television’S Leased And Public Access Channels, Majorie Heins, James N. Horwood, Robert T. Perry, Michael Sitcov
Panel Iv: Censorship Of Cable Television’S Leased And Public Access Channels, Majorie Heins, James N. Horwood, Robert T. Perry, Michael Sitcov
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Panel I: The Changing Landscape Of First Amendment Jurisprudence In Light Of The New Communications And Media Alliances, J. Richard Devlin, Theodore C. Hirt, Andrew A. Merdek
Panel I: The Changing Landscape Of First Amendment Jurisprudence In Light Of The New Communications And Media Alliances, J. Richard Devlin, Theodore C. Hirt, Andrew A. Merdek
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Panel Iii: Cable Versus The Telephone Companies: Can Telephone Companies Be Constitutionally Barred From Delivering Video Programming? , David E. Bronston, James J. Gilligan, Mark C. Hansen, Joseph A. Post
Panel Iii: Cable Versus The Telephone Companies: Can Telephone Companies Be Constitutionally Barred From Delivering Video Programming? , David E. Bronston, James J. Gilligan, Mark C. Hansen, Joseph A. Post
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.