Law Commons^™

Wearables And Where They Stick: Finding A Place For Tech Tattoos In The Ip Framework, Emily A. Mccutcheon

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Watch What You *Bleeping* Want: Interpretation Of Statutes Dealing With Advancing Technology In Light Of The Ninth Circuit Case Of "Disney Enterprises, Inc. V. Vidangel, Inc.", Thomas B. Norton

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Costs Of Trademarking Dolls, Jessica Silbey

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Curtin’s article, Zombie Cinderella and the Undead Public Domain, takes a recent case from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) as the basis for an argument that trademark doctrine needs stronger protection against the exclusive commercial appropriation of characters that are in the public domain. In that case, a doll manufacturer sought to register the term “Zombie Cinderella” for a doll that was zombie-ish and princess-like. The examiner refused registration because the term “Zombie Cinderella” for this kind of doll was confusingly similar to the mark for Walt Disney’s Cinderella doll. Although the TTAB overturned the examiner’s …

What We Don't See When We See Copyright As Property, Jessica Litman

Articles

For all of the rhetoric about the central place of authors in the copyright scheme, our copyright laws in fact give them little power and less money. Intermediaries own the copyrights, and are able to structure licenses so as to maximise their own revenue while shrinking their pay-outs to authors. Copyright scholars have tended to treat this point superficially, because – as lawyers – we take for granted that copyrights are property; property rights are freely alienable; and the grantee of a property right stands in the shoes of the original holder. I compare the 1710 Statute of Anne, which …

The Myth Of Uniformity In Ip Laws, Sharon K. Sandeen

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

When Congress enacts federal laws, it is often because of the asserted benefits of a “uniform” law and the, often unspoken, assumption that federal laws are somehow more uniform than uniform state laws. Infact, the uniformity argument was a primary justification for theenactment of both the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 and the EU Trade Secret Directive.

The quest for uniformity, particularly with respect to laws that relate to intellectual property rights, is an old story in the United States. During the drafting of the U.S. Constitution, the existence of inconsistent state laws was a central reason for the …

"You'll Lol @ This Tweet": Copyright Protection For Hashtag Gamers, Alan Lacerra

Florida State University Law Review

Hashtag games combine the fun of quick, incongruous exchanges with the work of creative expression and do so online through microblogging, predominantly (if not exclusively) on Twitter. Currently, hashtag-game participants face two main obstacles to copyright protection for their fun expressions: the expressions' brevity and Twitter's terms of service. To protect the copyrights that Internet users acquire by participating in hashtag games, courts should focus on the creativity rather than the brevity of the resulting expressions. Furthermore, Congress should amend the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to prevent Internet service providers, like Twitter, from encroaching on users' rights through broad …

What We Don't See When We See Copyright As Property, Jessica Litman

Law & Economics Working Papers

It is becoming increasingly clear that the supposed copyright wars that copyright scholars believed we were fighting – nominally pitting the interests of authors and creators against the interests of readers and other members of the audience – were never really about that at all. Instead the real conflict has been between the publishers, record labels, movie studios, and other intermediaries who rose to market dominance in the 20th century, and the digital services and platforms that have become increasingly powerful copyright players in the 21st. In this essay, adapted from the 13th annual University of Cambridge Center for Intellectual …

Symbols, Systems, And Software As Intellectual Property: Time For Contu, Part Ii?, Timothy K. Armstrong

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The functional nature of computer software underlies two propositions that were, until recently, fairly well settled in intellectual property law: first, that software, like other utilitarian articles, may qualify for patent protection; and second, that the scope of copyright protection for software is comparatively limited. Both propositions have become considerably shakier as a result of recent court decisions. Following Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014), the lower courts have invalidated many software patents as unprotectable subject matter. Meanwhile, Oracle America v. Google Inc., 750 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2014) extended far more expansive copyright protection …

Why The Copyright Act Expressly Preempts State-Level Public Performance Rights In Pre-1972 Recordings, James Fahringer

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Over the past several years, two former bandmates in the 1960s rock group, The Turtles, have initiated several lawsuits against the popular music streaming services, Pandora and Sirius XM, arguing that the band owns common law copyrights in the sound recordings of its songs, and that these state-level copyrights grant the band an exclusive public performance right in its sound recordings. If accepted, this argument has the potential to significantly distort federal copyright policy because states would not be constrained by any of the balancing features of the Copyright Act, including Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) safe harbors for Internet …

The De Minimis Defense In Sound Recordings: How A Trivial Claim Leads To A Big Question, Elvin Canario

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Commentary, Improving The Quality And Consistency Of Copyright Infringement Analysis In Music, Kristelia A. García

Publications

No abstract provided.

The New Separability, Lili Levi

Articles

In Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, the Supreme Court recently unveiled a new approach to separability. Because copyright law protects expression, not function, aesthetic features of useful articles are eligible for copyright protection only if they are separable from the functional work in which they are incorporated. But the Copyright Actdoes not define separability, and Star Athletica is the latest judicial effort to try to fill that void. Unfortunately, the new separability is open to a wide range of critiques. Relatively low-hanging fruit are the vagueness and indeterminacy of the new test, the Court's unsatisfactory attempts to avoid defining "function," …

Creative Commons: An Explainer, Kincaid C. Brown

Law Librarian Scholarship

Copyright protection attaches automatically to original works you create, whether a poem, photograph, painting, song, video, or essay. Copyright limits what others can do with your creative work and protects your original work from, for example, being compiled or reused and sold for profit. If you hold the copyright—and didn’t, say, create the original work in an employment context where it may be subject to being a work for hire—you may want to allow others to use your work for particular purposes. You could individually negotiate a license granting rights to each person, which would undoubtedly take more and more …

Beyond Copyright: Applying A Radical Idea--Expression Dichotomy To The Ownership Of Fictional Characters, Tze Ping Lim

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Copyright protection for fictional characters in the United States is expanding on an uncertain and incoherent basis. With the event of the case Towle v. DC Comics, courts have now applied three different tests to discern a character's copyrightability. Towle was a significant decision because it was the first time a US court had held that a car (the Batmobile) was a copyrightable character. Although courts have utilized the ideas-expression dichotomy to differentiate unprotectable character "ideas" from protectable character 'expressions', the dichotomy is unlikely to alleviate the law's uncertainty and incoherence. Both the US ideas-expression dichotomy and character copyrightability doctrines …

The New Separability, Lili Levi

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

In Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, the Supreme Court recently unveiled a new approach to separability. Because copyright law protects expression, not function, aesthetic features of useful articles are eligible for copyright protection only if they are separable from the functional work in which they are incorporated. But the Copyright Act does not define separability, and Star Athletica is the latest judicial effort to try to fill that void. Unfortunately, the new separability is open to a wide range of critiques. Relatively low-hanging fruit are the vagueness and indeterminacy of the new test, the Court's unsatisfactory attempts to avoid defining …

Intellectual Property In Experience, Madhavi Sunder

Michigan Law Review

In today’s economy, consumers demand experiences. From Star Wars to Harry Potter, fans do not just want to watch or read about their favorite characters— they want to be them. They don the robes of Gryffindor, flick their wands, and drink the butterbeer. The owners of fantasy properties understand this, expanding their offerings from light sabers to the Galaxy’s Edge®, the new Disney Star Wars immersive theme park opening in 2019.Since Star Wars, Congress and the courts have abetted what is now a $262 billion-a-year industry in merchandising, fashioning “merchandising rights” appurtenant to copyrights and trademarks that give fantasy owners …

Creative Commons: An Explainer, Kincaid C. Brown

Law Librarian Scholarship

Copyright protection attaches automatically to original works you create, whether a poem, photograph, painting, song, video, or essay. Copyright limits what others can do with your creative work and protects your original work from, for example, being compiled or reused and sold for profit. If you hold the copyright—and didn’t, say, create the original work in an employment context where it may be subject to being a work for hire—you may want to allow others to use your work for particular purposes. You could individually negotiate a license granting rights to each person, which would undoubtedly take more and more …

Copyright Law And Photocopying Practice In Nigeria, Glory Onoyeyan

Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal)

The protection of copyright is an obligation of nations in order to promote and encourage innovation and creativity The copyright law gives the owner of copyrighted work the exclusive right to control the reproduction of copyrighted works. This right, however, does not bestow on the copyright owner an absolute monopoly to control access to copyrighted information. The paper highlighted that illegal photocopying practice of copyrighted work is damaging to the rights of owners of copyrighted materials as it stifles creativity, innovation and development, and the introduction of the doctrine of ‘fair use’ is aimed at balancing the exclusive rights of …

Foreign Authors' Enforcement Of U.S. Reversion Rights, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

Thank you to all of the participants, and especially the first two panelists, for setting one part of the scene. I am going to talk about the United States’ termination right and some Berne and private international law consequences or implications of the termination right.

First, however, I’d like to advert to the two goals Rebecca Giblin referenced in her talk. One is remuneration, the other is dissemination. Author-protective laws in other countries also address dissemination. As Séverine Dusollier mentioned, a number of national laws include an obligation to exploit the work: if the publisher does not exploit the work, …