Law Commons^™

Machiavellian Intellectual Property, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In his controversial essay, “Faith-Based Intellectual Property,” Mark Lemley argues that moral theories of intellectual property are wrong because they are based on faith, rather than evidence. This article suggests that Lemley’s argument is controversial at least in part because it explicitly acknowledges that consequentialist and deontological theories of intellectual property rely on incompatible normative premises: consequentialist theories hold that intellectual property is justified only if it increases social welfare; deontological theories hold that intellectual property is justified even if it decreases social welfare. According to Berlin, the genius of Machiavelli was to recognize that when two moral theories have …

Innovation Heuristics: Experiments On Sequential Creativity In Intellectual Property, Stefan Bechtold, Christopher Buccafusco, Christopher Jon Sprigman

Indiana Law Journal

All creativity and innovation build on existing ideas. Authors and inventors copy, adapt, improve, interpret, and refine the ideas that have come before them. The central task of intellectual property (IP) law is regulating this sequential innovation to ensure that initial creators and subsequent creators receive the appropriate sets of incentives. Although many scholars have applied the tools of economic analysis to consider whether IP law is successful in encouraging cumulative innovation, that work has rested on a set of untested assumptions about creators’ behavior. This Article reports four novel creativity experiments that begin to test those assumptions. In particular, …

University Ip: The University As Coordinator Of The Team Production Process, Samuel Estreicher, Kristina A. Yost

Indiana Law Journal

This Article focuses on intellectual property (IP) issues in the university setting. Often, universities require faculty who have been hired in whole or in part to invent to assign inventions created within the scope of their employment to the university. In addition, the most effective way to secure compliance with the Bayh-Dole Act, which deals with ownership of inventions involving federally funded research, is for the university to take title to such inventions. Failure to specify who has title can result in title passing to the government. Once the university asserts ownership, it then decides whether to process a patent …

Copyright In A Nutshell For Found Footage Filmmakers, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Popular Media

Found footage is an existing motion picture that is used as an element of a new motion picture. Found footage filmmaking dates back to the origins of cinema. Filmmakers are practical and frugal, and happy to reuse materials when they can. But found footage filmmaking gradually developed into a rough genre of films that included documentaries, parodies, and collages. And found footage became a familiar element of many other genres, which used found footage to illustrate a historical point or evoke an aesthetic response.

It can be difficult to determine whether found footage is protected by copyright, who owns the …

Scenes From The Copyright Office, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This essay uses a series of vignettes drawn from Billy Joel’s career to describe his encounters with copyright law. It begins by examining the ownership of the copyright in Joel’s songs. It continues by considering the authorship of Joel’s songs, and it concludes by evaluating certain infringement actions filed against Joel. This Essay observes that Joel’s encounters with copyright law were confusing and frustrating, but also quite typical. The banality of his experiences captures the uncertainty and incoherence of copyright doctrine.

Dueling Monologues On The Public Domain: What Digital Copyright Can Learn From Antitrust, Timothy K. Armstrong

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

This article, written for the inaugural volume of the University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal, explores the disconnect between contemporary United States intellectual property law and the often quite different consensus views of disinterested expert opinion. Questions concerning how copyright law treats the public domain (that is, uncopyrighted material) supply a lens for comparing the law as it stands with the law as scholars have suggested it should be. The ultimate goal is to understand why a quarter century of predominantly critical scholarship on intellectual property seems to have exerted such limited influence on Congress and …

All's Fair In Copyright And Costumes: Fair Use Defense To Copyright Infringement In Cosplay, Molly Rose Madonia

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Collegiate Athletes And The Right To Their Marks, Joseph E. Clemente

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Under Seal But Not Under Law: In Re City Of Houston's Effect On Municipal Insignias, Tyler M. Helsel

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

In Pursuit Of Patent Quality (And Reflection Of Reification), Kenneth L. Port, Lucas M. Hjelle, Molly Littman

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Eu Directive Proposal: Trade Secret, Natalja Sosnova

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Iheartgeo-Fencing?: The Section 114 Exemption That Illustrates Why Full Sound Recording Rights Are The Sine Qua Non For A Vibrant Music Industry, Bradley Ryba

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Punitive Damage And Attorney Fee Awards In Trade Secret Cases, Richard F. Dole Jr.

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Myriad: A Look Into The Future Of Genetic Patentable Subject Matter, Nathan Edward Cromer

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

The Commercial Felony Streaming Act: The Call For Expansion Of Criminal Copyright Infringement, Jeff Yostanto

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Skating On Thin Ice: The Intellectual Property Ramifications Of A Figure Skater's Public Performance, Vanessa E. Richmond

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Test Data Protection: Different Approaches And Implementation In Pharmaceuticals, Wael Armouti, Mohammad F. A. Nsour

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Semicommons In Fluid Resources, Henry E. Smith

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

The Case For Incentivizing Healthy Food By Using Patents, Enrico Bonadio

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

A Fake Right Of Priority Under The Cross-Strait Agreement On Intellectual Property Right Protection And Cooperation, Ping-Hsun Chen

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

Unh School Of Law Ip Library: 20th Anniversary Reflection On The Only Academic Ip Library In The United States, Jon R. Cavicchi

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] The UNH School of Law Intellectual Property Library celebrates its twentieth anniversary this year. It is a fortuitous time for this look back and for strategic considerations for the future. This anniversary comes at a time in the history of legal education when conditions over the past few years have intensified the analysis of mission and resources for law school libraries. This article is a retrospective review of the history and dynamics surrounding the founding and first twenty years of growth. It is also an analysis of the future growth and mission of the IP Library during times that …

Plagiarism Is Not A Crime, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Copyright infringement and plagiarism are related but distinct concepts. Copyright prohibits certain uses of original works of authorship without permission. Plagiarism norms prohibit copying certain expressions, facts, and ideas without attribution. The prevailing theory of copyright is the economic theory, which holds that copyright is justified because it is economically efficient. This article considers whether academic plagiarism norms are economically efficient. It concludes that academic plagiarism norms prohibiting non-copyright infringing plagiarism are not efficient and should be ignored.

Copyright In Pantomime, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Why does the Copyright Act specifically provide for the protection of “pantomimes”? This Article shows that the Copyright Act of 1976 amended the subject matter of copyright to include pantomimes simply in order to conform it to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. It further shows that the Berlin Act of 1909 amended the Berne Convention to provide for copyright protection of “les pantomimes” and “entertainments in dumb show” in order to ensure copyright protection of silent motion pictures. Unfortunately, the original purpose of providing copyright protection to '“pantomimes” was forgotten. This Article argues that …