Law Commons^™

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 …

Rejecting The De Minimis Defense To Infringement Of Sound Recording Copyrights, Michael G. Kubik

Notre Dame Law Review

Part I of this Note examines the history of sound recording copyrights, the role of digital sampling in the music industry, and the basic principles and functions of the de minimis defense. Part II carefully dissects the Bridgeport and VMG opinions. Part III then considers the merits of each opinion and concludes that Bridgeport reached the correct conclusion. This argument rests on the statutory scheme of Title 17 of the U.S. Code and the plain text of its applicable provisions, bolstered by their legislative history, giving life to a unique statutory creature that thrives in a manner inconsistent with traditional …

Silent Similarity, Jessica D. Litman

Articles

From 1909 to 1930, U.S. courts grappled with claims by authors of prose works claiming that works in a new art form—silent movies—had infringed their copyrights. These cases laid the groundwork for much of modern copyright law, from their broad expansion of the reproduction right, to their puzzled grappling with the question how to compare works in dissimilar media, to their confusion over what sort of evidence should be relevant to show copyrightability, copying and infringement. Some of those cases—in particular, Nichols v. Universal Pictures—are canonical today. They are not, however, well-understood. In particular, the problem at the heart of …

Using Public Disclosure As The Vesting Point For Moral Rights Under The Visual Artists Rights Act, Elizabeth M. Bock

Michigan Law Review

In 2010, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit confronted the novel question of when moral rights protections vest under the Visual Artists Rights Act. In Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Foundation, Inc. v. Bichel, the First Circuit determined that the protections of the Visual Artists Rights Act begin when a work is "created" under the Copyright Act. This Note argues that this decision harms moral rights conceptually and is likely to result in unpredictable and inconsistent decisions. This Note proposes instead that these statutory protections should vest when an artist determines that his work is complete and presents …

Sparks Nugget. State Tax Exemption Of Food Used By Casinos For Comped Meals, Steve Johnson

UNLV Gaming Law Journal

In their search for new sources of revenue, states have legalized and sought to tax many kinds of gaming. Forty-eight of the fifty states of the United States permit one or more types of legal gaming. An important technique in casino and some other types of gaming is giving “comps” – complimentary goods or services – to player-customers. A frequent type of comp is free meals on the casino premises or elsewhere. Gaming establishments also often give free meals to their employees.

Comps have been controversial for federal income tax purposes. A recent Nevada case, Sparks Nugget, and related cases …

La Russa's Loophole: Trademark Infringement Lawsuits And Social Networks, Jillian Bluestone

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal

No abstract provided.

National Cable & Telecommunications Ass'n V. Brand X Internet Services: A War Of Words, The Effect Of Classifying Cable Modem Service As An Information Service, David P. Manni

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Problems Ascertaining The Bare Meaning Of Statutes Regulating Adult Entertainment: The Eleventh Circuit Falls Back On The Secondary Effects Doctrine In Ranch House, Inc. V. Amerson, Thomas Schrack

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal

No abstract provided.

No More Clowning Around: Ringling Bros.-Barnum & (And) Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. V. Utah Division Of Travel Development Evaluates The Federal Trademark Dilution Act, Christina M. Bidlingmaier

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal

No abstract provided.