Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Freedom of speech

Courts

Journal

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Protecting Nominative Fair Use, Parody, And Other Speech-Interests By Reforming The Inconsistent Exemptions From Trademark Liability, Samuel M. Duncan Oct 2010

Protecting Nominative Fair Use, Parody, And Other Speech-Interests By Reforming The Inconsistent Exemptions From Trademark Liability, Samuel M. Duncan

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Federal trademark law exempts certain communicative uses of a trademark from liability so that the public can freely use a trademark to comment on the markowner or to describe its products. These exemptions for "speech-interests" are badly flawed because their scope is inconsistent between infringement and dilution law, and because the cost and difficulty of claiming their protection varies significantly from court to court. Many speech-interests remain vulnerable to the chilling threat of litigation even though they are "protected" by current law. This Note proposes a simple statutory reform that will remedy this inconsistency by creating an express safe harbor …


The United Mall Of America: Free Speech, State Constitutions, And The Growing Fortress Of Private Property, Jennifer Niles Coffin Jun 2000

The United Mall Of America: Free Speech, State Constitutions, And The Growing Fortress Of Private Property, Jennifer Niles Coffin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Scholars have called the shopping mall the modern replacement for the traditional town square, a claim that is supported by both public investment in infrastructure through municipal and state bond issues and by the presence of public services and events in many malls. Mall owners and tenants have exploited this quasi public character by inviting government agencies to become tenants in the malls ("City Hall at the Mall") despite claiming that malls are private property where constitutionally protected freedoms do not apply. After an initial and shortlived ruling that mall visitors do indeed have free speech rights, the Supreme Court …