Law Commons^™

Comments On Preliminary Draft 9, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Jane C. Ginsburg, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Scholarship

We are writing to offer our views on Preliminary Draft No. 9 (“PD9”) and express our deep and persistent concern about the direction and methodology that the Project continues to take, which we have sought to address and remedy at multiple points over the last several years. The elements of PD9 that we describe below are, in our view, particularly striking illustrations of the problems that we have previously identified. The gravity and salience of PD9’s problems are borne out in the comments of Judge Pierre Leval, who describes elements of the draft as requiring “a substantial editing and rewriting.” …

Additional Comments On Preliminary Draft 9, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

I am adding to the comments submitted by Profs. Balganesh, Menell and myself a list of points in PD9 that I believe require correction or clarification. These comments do not include Chapters 8, 10 or 11.

Comments On Council Draft 7 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

CD7 adopts several of the suggestions in my comments on PD8; I appreciate those modifications. CD7 does not, however, respond to a number of other criticisms and suggestions regarding PD8. For the benefit of the Council, I reprise the suggestions that I consider to be most significant to ensuring the accuracy of the draft (page and line references have been changed to reflect CD7)

Learned Hand's Copyright Law, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

Learned Hand is often described as the greatest copyright judge to have ever sat on the bench. By the 1950s, the most important parts of U.S. copyright law had been his creation, all from his time as a judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Despite all of this, there has been little systematic analysis of Hand’s approach to copyright and of the reasons why his jurisprudence in multiple areas of copyright law have survived the test of time. This Article argues that the longevity, influence and canonical status of Hand’s contributions to copyright are closely tied to his …

Understanding Intellectual Property: Expression, Function, And Individuation, Mala Chatterjee

Faculty Scholarship

Underlying the fundamental structure of intellectual property law — specifically, the division between copyright and patent law — are at least two substantive philosophical assumptions. The first is that artistic works and inventions are importantly different, such that they warrant different legal systems: copyright law on the one hand, and patent law on the other. And the second is that particular artistic works and inventions can be determinately individuated from each other, and can thereby be the subjects of distinct and delineated legal rights. But neither the law nor existing scholarship provides a comprehensive analysis of these categories, what distinguishes …

Misreading Campbell: Lessons For Warhol, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Scholarship

In Andy Warhol Foundation (AWF) v. Goldsmith, the Supreme Court is set to revisit its most salient fair use precedent that introduced the idea of a “transformative use.” Purporting to rely on the Court’s adoption of “transformative use” as a way of understanding the fair use doctrine in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., many lower courts, including the district court below, have effectively substituted an amorphous “transformativeness” inquiry for the full statutory framework and factors that Congress and Campbell prescribe. At the oral argument in AWF, the Justices focused on how the transformativeness of a work might …

Twenty Years Of Us Digital Copyright: Adapting From Analogue, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

This review of the period 2001–21 in US copyright law will summarize digital-dominated developments concerning the scope of exclusive rights and exceptions and liability regimes. It will address several developments, all related to the impact of the internet on the exploitation of works of authorship. Digital storage and communications have called into question the scope of the exclusive rights set out in the US Copyright Act, and they have considerably expanded the reach of the fair use exemption. They have strained statutory and common law regimes of secondary liability and prompted the development of a ‘volition’ predicate to primary liability. …

Comments On Preliminary Draft 8 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

PD8 represents a great deal of labor, for which the Reporters deserve recognition. As detailed below, however, PD8’s occasional departures from or omissions of statutory text may not only be misleading or confusing, but – as has been the case with prior drafts – often have the result, if not the purpose, of whittling down the scope of copyright protection. In addition to identifying those instances and explaining their consequences, the following comments will suggest clarifications to some of the Comments and Illustrations.

Floors And Ceilings In International Copyright Treaties: Berne/Trips/Wct Minima And Maxima, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

This paper addresses “floors” – minimum substantive international protections, and “ceilings” – maximum substantive international protections, set out in the Berne Convention and subsequent multilateral copyright accords. While much scholarship has addressed Berne minima, the “maxima” have generally received less attention. This Comment first describes the general structure of the Berne Convention, TRIPS and WCT regarding these contours, and then analyzes their application to the recent “press publishers’ right” promulgated in the 2019 EU Digital Single Market Directive. Within the universe of multilateral copyright obligations, the Berne maxima (prohibition of protection for facts and news of the day), buttressed by …

Proving Copying, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Scholarship

Proof that a defendant actually copied from a copyrighted work is a critical part of a claim for copyright infringement. Indeed, absent such copying, there is no infringement. The most common method of proving copying involves the use of circumstantial evidence, consisting of proof that a defendant had “access” to the protected work, and a showing of “similarities” between the copy and the protected work. In inferring copying from the combination of such evidence, courts have for many decades developed a framework known as the “inverse ratio rule,” which allows them to modulate the level of proof needed on access …

The Genius Of Common-Law Intellectual Property, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

Among Richard Epstein’s influential contributions to legal scholarship over the years is his writing on common-law intellectual property. In it, we see his attempt to meld the innate logic of the common law’s conceptual structure with the realities of the modern information economy. Common-law intellectual property refers to different judge-made causes of action that create forms of exclusive rights and privileges in intangibles, interferences that are then rendered enforceable through private liability. In this essay, I examine Epstein’s writing on two such doctrines, hot-news misappropriation and cybertrespass, which embrace several important ideas to which modern discussions of intellectual property would …

Intellectual Property, Independent Creation, And The Lockean Commons, Mala Chatterjee

Faculty Scholarship

Copyrights and patents are differently structured intellectual property rights in different kinds of entities. Nonetheless, they are widely regarded by U.S. scholars as having the same theoretical underpinnings. Though scholars have sought to connect philosophical theories of property to intellectual property, with a particular interest in the labor theory of John Locke, these explorations have not sufficiently probed copyrights’ and patents’ doctrinal differences or their philosophical implications for the theories explored. This Article argues that a defining difference between copyrights and patents has normative significance for the framework of Lockean property theory: namely, that copyright law treats independent creation as …

Of Autonomy, Sacred Rights, And Personal Marks, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

This Response examines three different senses in which the idea of autonomy might operate within trademark law’s rules relating to personal marks (i.e., marks that identity an individual) and shows that each of them is critically incomplete or too weak to independently sustain the justificatory burden for the domain. It then examines the worrisome possibility that courts’ allusions to autonomy here are little more than a trope for other considerations. It finally looks at how a genuine commitment to autonomy might be integrated into the principally market-driven framework of trademark law.

The Institutionalist Turn In Copyright, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

The institutionalist turn refers to the reality that over the last decade and a half, the Court’s copyright jurisprudence has come to focus less and less on directly resolving substantive issues within the landscape of copyright doctrine. It has instead become a principal site of debate and disagreement over issues that have a direct bearing on the role, competence, and legitimacy of the Court within the copyright system. The institutionalist turn does not imply that the Court’s decisions have altogether avoided engaging substantive copyright issues; merely that its engagement of copyright doctrine has come to be intertwined with — and …

Copyright, Creativity, Big Media And Cultural Value: Incorporating The Author, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

Copyright, Creativity, Big Media and Cultural Value is a wide-ranging work of immense erudition and archival research, combining several historical studies of the ‘incorporation’ of the author in different sectors of the ‘creative industries’. The book’s subtitle, ‘Incorporating the Author’, astutely encompasses multiple meanings, whose implications the book works through. These include the author as an initiating participant in a larger economic structure (Chapter 3 (print publishing)). But also, the author as a bit player enveloped by a larger economic structure (Chapter 5 (film industry)). And the author (or performer) as an autonomous object of economic value (Chapters …

Comments On Council Draft 6 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg, June M. Besek

Faculty Scholarship

We appreciate the Reporters’ incorporation of some of our comments on recent drafts. There remain, however, certain flaws in CD6 that should be addressed. We explain the issues, below.

Comments On Preliminary Draft 7 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg, June M. Besek

Faculty Scholarship

PD7 is often confusing, largely as a result of failure to provide important explanations or definitions, or to tell the reader where that information can be found. Key terms, such as “edicts of law” and “formalities” remain undefined. Formalities are a principal topic of PD7; they deserve a more thorough description than the draft contains, addressing what formalities are, whether every declaratory obligation (or option) is a “formality,” or only those that go to the existence or enforcement of copyright (this is the Berne Convention meaning of “formality”).

Trading Pharma Goods The Wto Legal Framework, Neeraj Rajan Sabitha, Petros C. Mavroidis

Faculty Scholarship

Trading of pharma goods has attracted widespread global attention in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Agreement on Trade in Pharmaceutical Products (“Pharma Agreement”) – a sectoral agreement between a handful of WTO members – was concluded in 1994 and aimed to eliminate duties on various pharmaceutical products. Nevertheless, this is all that the Pharma Agreement does: it eliminates duties and does not touch upon the regulatory aspects relating to marketing of pharmaceutical goods. WTO members remain sovereign to decide on this score, but must observe the WTO Licensing Agreement as well as nondiscrimination. Thus, while the intensity of …

Comment On Andy Warhol Found. For The Visual Arts, Inc. V. Goldsmith, 992 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2021), Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

The Second Circuit’s decision in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith retreats both from its prior caselaw’s generous characterization of artistic reuse as “transformative,” and from the outcome-determinacy of a finding of “transformativeness.” The decision suggests both that courts may be applying a more critical understanding of what “transforms” copied content, and that courts may be reforming “transformative use” to reinvigorate the other statutory factors, particularly the inquiry into the impact of the use on the potential markets for or value of the copied work. The court also provided an important explanation of copyrightable authorship in photographs.

In addition to analyzing …

Letter To Council Members Regarding Council Draft 5, Jane C. Ginsburg, June M. Besek

Faculty Scholarship

We understand that the ALI Council will consider Council Draft 5 (CD5) of the Restatement of the Law, Copyright (Copyright Restatement) project at its meeting on January 20-21, 2021. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on CD5. We hope that you will give careful consideration to these comments and send CD5 back to the Reporters to address the problems we describe below.

Conundra Of The Berne Convention Concept Of The Country Of Origin, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

This essay explores one of the most important, but occasionally intractable, issues under the Berne Convention, the concept of Country of Origin. Article 5(4) of that treaty defines a work’s country of origin, but leaves out several situations, leaving those who interpret and apply the treaty without guidance in ascertaining the country of origin. I will call those situations the “Conundra of the country of origin,” and will explore two of them here. First, what is the country of origin of an unpublished work whose authors are nationals of different countries? Second, what is the country of origin of a …

International Law Association's Guidelines On Intellectual Property And Private International Law ("Kyoto Guidelines"): Applicable Law, Marie-Elodie Ancel, Nicolas Binctin, Josef Drexl, Mireille Van Eechoud, Jane C. Ginsburg, Toshiyuki Kono, Gyooho Lee, Rita Matulionyte, Edouard Treppoz, Dário Moura Vicente

Faculty Scholarship

The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on In­tellectual Property and Private International Law (“Kyoto Guidelines”) provides principles on the choice of law in international intellectual property matters. The Guidelines confirm the traditional principle of the lex loci protectionis for the existence, transferabil­ity, scope and infringement of intellectual property rights. The law applicable to the initial ownership of registered rights is governed by the lex loci protec­tionis whereas the law of the closest connection is applied to determine the ownership of copyright. For contracts, freedom of choice is acknowledged. With regard to ubiquitous or multi-state infringement and …

Legal Internalism In Modern Histories Of Copyright, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Taisu Zhang

Faculty Scholarship

Legal internalism refers to the internal point of view that professional participants in a legal practice develop toward it. It represents a behavioral phenomenon wherein such participants treat the domain of law (or a subset of it) as normative, epistemologically self-contained, and logically coherent on its own terms regardless of whether the law actually embodies those characteristics. Thus understood, legal internalism remains an important characteristic of all modern legal systems. In this Review, we examine three recent interdisciplinary histories of copyright law to showcase the working of legal internalism. We argue that while their interdisciplinary emphasis adds to the conversation …

The Use Of Technical Experts In Software Copyright Cases: Rectifying The Ninth Circuit’S “Nutty” Rule, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Scholarship

Courts have long been skeptical about the use of expert witnesses in copyright cases. More than four decades ago, and before Congress extended copyright law to protect computer software, the Ninth Circuit in Krofft Television Productions, Inc. v. McDonald’s Corp. ruled that expert testimony was inadmissible to determine whether Mayor McCheese and the merry band of McDonald’s characters infringed copyright protection for Wilhelmina W. Witchiepoo and the other imaginative H.R. Pufnstuf costumed characters. Since the emergence of software copyright infringement cases in the 1980s, substantially all software copyright cases have permitted expert witnesses to aid juries in understanding software code. …

Long Live The Common Law Of Copyright!: Georgia V. Public.Resource.Org., Inc. And The Debate Over Judicial Role In Copyright, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

In Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., the Supreme Court resurrected a nineteenth-century copyright doctrine – the government edicts doctrine – and applied it to statutory annotations prepared by a legislative agency. While the substance of the decision has serious impli­cations for due process and the rule of law, the Court’s treatment of the doctrine recognized an invigorated role for courts in the development of copyright law through the use of principled reasoning. In expounding the doctrine, the Court announced a vision for the judicial role in copy­right adjudication that is at odds with the dominant approach under the Copyright …

Should The U.S. Government Actively Assert Its Own Patents?, Christopher J. Morten, Barry Datlof, Amy Kapczynski, Donna Meuth, Zain Rizvi

Faculty Scholarship

On March 10, 2021, our journal partnered with the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law and Policy to host a symposium addressing the role and impact of U.S. innovation policy on access to medicine. Our 2021 Symposium Issue — Volume 11, Issue 1 — captures that event.

The following article represents the second of four panels. This panel asked, “Should the U.S. government actively assert its own patents?” The panel was moderated by Christopher Morten, Deputy Director of NYU Law’s Technology Law & Policy Clinic. The panelists included Barry Datlof, Chief of Business Development and Commercialization in the Office of Medical …

Authoring The Law, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

Copyright law denies protection to legal texts through a rule known as the “government edicts doctrine”. Entirely a creation of nineteenth century courts, the government edicts doctrine treats expression produced by lawmakers in the exercise of their lawmaking function as altogether uncopyrightable. Despite having been in existence for over a century, the doctrine remains shrouded in significant mystery and complexity. Lacking statutory recognition, the doctrine has come to be seen as driven by open-ended considerations of “public policy” that draw on the overarching importance of public access to laws. In its decision in Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org., Inc., the Supreme …

The Big Data Regulator, Rebooted: Why And How The Fda Can And Should Disclose Confidential Data On Prescription Drugs And Vaccines, Christopher J. Morten, Amy Kapczynski

Faculty Scholarship

Medicines and vaccines are complex products, and it is often extraordinarily difficult to know whether they help or hurt. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) holds an enormous reservoir of data that sheds light on that precise question, yet currently releases only a trickle to researchers, doctors, and patients. Recent examples show that data secrecy can be deadly, and existing laws such as the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) cannot solve the problem. We present here a wealth of new evidence about the urgency of the problem and argue that the FDA must “reboot” its rules to proactively disclose all …

Comments On Preliminary Draft 6, Jane C. Ginsburg, June M. Besek

Faculty Scholarship

We briefly reiterate the principal General Comments we made with respect to PD5, because PD6 continues, including in its two new sections, to manifest the same overall shortcomings: (i) the relationship of the draft to the statute remains highly inconsistent; (ii) the Restatement needs a consistent and transparent methodology for restating a statute; and (iii) continuing to carry on without clear methodological principles will undermine the utility of this project and the credibility of the ALI.

Comments On Preliminary Draft 5 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg, June M. Besek

Faculty Scholarship

We appreciate the considerable work that has gone into PD5, and believe that several of its provisions and Comments accurately quote or state and explain the law. Nonetheless, PD5 manifests several of the earlier drafts’ shortcomings. We remain particularly concerned that the relationship of this draft to the statute remains highly inconsistent, not to say erratic. We are not sanguine that our oft-repeated calls that the Reporters and ALI devise a consistent and transparent methodology for restating a statute will finally be heeded. (To the extent there is a guiding principle behind this Restatement, and PD5, it often appears to …