Law Commons^™

Trading Rabbit Ears For Wi-Fi: Aereo, The Public Performance Right, And How Broadcasters Want To Control The Business Of Internet Tv, Jacob Marshall

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Aereo, a start-up company that allows consumers to stream free, over-the-air broadcasts to their phones and computers, seems rather innocuous. Yet the major broadcasting networks have attempted to shut Aereo down since its inception, claiming that Aereo infringes on their copyright. Aereo claims that its unique technology--where each user is assigned their own, individual antenna--ensures that Aereo does not infringe on the broadcasters' public performance rights. The United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari on the matter. The broadcasters are approaching the case as an existential battle, claiming that Aereo threatens retransmission fees, licensing fees broadcasters collect from cable companies. …

Copyright, Plagiarism, And Emerging Norms In Digital Publishing, J. D. Lipton

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Today's copyright law derives from the needs of the publishing industry in centuries past. The digital world creates even more significant concerns for authors and publishers than those that arose with the advent of the printing press. Digital technology enables easy, fast, and inexpensive global copying and distribution of digital texts. Other digitized industries--such as the music, movie, and video-game industries--have faced these challenges with a higher apparent success rate, at least in the courts, than the publishing industry. This Article considers why publishing has been less successful in protecting its online copyrights and examines the extent to which copyright …

The Institutional Progress Clause, Jake Linford

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

There is a curious anomaly at the intersection of copyright and free speech. In cases like Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court has exhibited a profound distaste for tailoring free speech rights and restrictions based on the identity of the speaker. The Copyright Act, however, is full of such tailoring, extending special rights to some classes of copyright owners and special defenses to some classes of users. A Supreme Court serious about maintaining speaker neutrality would be appalled.

A set of compromises at the heart of the Copyright Act reflects interest-group lobbying rather than a …