Communications Law | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

The Financial Implications Of The Une-Platform: A Review Of The Evidence, T. Randolph Beard, George S. Ford, Christopher Klein

CommLaw Conspectus: Journal of Communications Law and Technology Policy (1993-2015)

No abstract provided.

Go to article

"Don't Let The Sun Go Down On Me:" An In-Depth Look At Opportunistic Business Method Patent Licensing And A Proposed Solution To Allow Small-Defendant Business Method Users To Sing A Happier Tune, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1359 (2004), Andrea Lynn Evensen

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Cross Burning Revisited: What The Supreme Court Should Have Done In Virginia V. Black And Why It Didn’T, W. Wat Hopkins

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

The Supreme Court of the United States, in R.A. V. v. St. Paul, created a complicated framework of law that, despite years of case law to the contrary, would allow a court to hold a law banning cross burning to be constitutional, even if the law was not content-neutral. The ruling caused considerable problems in cases involving cross burning that reached lower appellate courts. In Virginia v. Black, the Court had the opportunity to resolve the problem, but refused to do so. Instead, the Court restructured the law related to intimidating and threatening speech, creating even more ambiguity. Under the …

Go to article

Play It Again, Sam: Webcasters’ Sound Recording Complement As An Unconstitutional Restraint On Free Speech, Amanda S. Reid

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Music embodies two copyrights: one for the words and notes, and another for the particular sound recording. Copyright law provides for a compulsory license that enables a Webcaster to transmit songs without first negotiating price and permission, provided a royalty fee is paid. A condition for being eligible for the statutory license is compliance with the "sound recording performance complement," which limits the number of songs that may be played during a three-hour period to no more than three songs from one album, and no more than two songs back to back. This Article argues that the "sound recording performance …

Go to article

Redefining The Transformative Use Of Copyrighted Works: Toward A Fair Use Standard In The Digital Environment, Jisuk Woo

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

This paper analyzes the transformative use factor in fair use analysis of copyright law. The author argues that, in the changing information environment stimulated by digital information technology, the end user's creativity in their activities of using works of authorship should be the focus in applying the principle of transformative use rather than the subsequent creation of transformed work as found in the lower court cases after Campbell.

Go to article

But We Have To Protect Our Source: How Electronic Voting Companies' Proprietary Code Ruins Elections, Andrew Massey

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

In the wake of the disastrous 2000 Presidential election, reformers turned to touch-screen electronic voting machines, or DREs, to avoid repeating Florida's experience with endless recounts and hanging chads. As soon as DREs were introduced, however, criticism quickly mounted, focusing on the machines' error-ridden code, inability to perform recounts, and susceptibility to hacking. This note explores how the problems associated with DREs stem directly from their reliance on proprietary source code. This note puts forth the argument that proprietary code place's electronic voting companies' intellectual property rights ahead of the public's need for an accountable and transparent voting system. In …

Go to article

Holding The Spymasters Accountable After 9/11: A Proposed Model For Cia Disclosure Requirements Under The Freedom Of Information Act, Martin E. Halstuk

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

For the last two decades, near-blanket CIA secrecy has gone largely unchecked, principally because of CIA v. Sims, a sweeping 1985 U.S. Supreme Court decision that exempted the Agency from virtually any disclosure requirements under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The uncurbed secrecy that the Court has sanctioned effectively blocks public and press efforts to evaluate CIA performance, thus making Agency accountability difficult, if not impossible. The well-publicized missteps and failures by the CIA in connection with the 9/11 terrorist attacks illustrate the follies of how excessive secrecy can conceal grave problems in Agency management. This article argues that …

Go to article

Sharing And Stealing, Jessica Litman

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

The purpose of copyright is to encourage the creation and mass dissemination of a wide variety of works. Until recently, most means of mass dissemination required a significant capital investment. The lion's share of the economic proceeds of copyrights were therefore channeled to publishers and distributors, and the law was designed to facilitate that. Digital distribution invites us to reconsider all of the assumptions underlying that model. We are still in the early history of the networked digital environment, but already we've seen experiments with both direct and consumer-to-consumer distribution of works of authorship. One remarkable example of the difference …

Go to article

Picking Up The Pieces Of Grokster: A New Approach To File Sharing, Tom Graves

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

The introduction of peer-to-peer file-sharing has created a plethora of new legal issues regarding the creation and distribution of music recordings. The music, however, is only half of the story. The case of MGM Studios v. Grokster addresses the tension between promoting progress in music and protecting the development of new technologies. Although it may be time to revisit the judicial standard for vicarious and contributory copyright infringement in the file-sharing context, a new legislative framework must ultimately be found. The creators of music should be compensated for their work, but not at the unnecessary expense of new and useful …

Go to article

Can The Right Of Publicity Afford Free Speech - A New Right Of Publicity Test For First Amendment Cases, Jason K. Levine

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

The right of publicity finds itself increasingly threatened by the First Amendment. Recent decisions at both the state and federal levels have served to highlight the confusion and lack of uniformity. For example, the Ninth Circuit recently held that an artist could not sell T-shirts with a charcoal drawing of the Three Stooges without permission, yet shortly thereafter the Sixth Circuit rejected Tiger Woods' attempt to prevent an artist from selling a painting of him winning a golf tournament, on essentially the same grounds. The author argues that the right of publicity and the First Amendment can co-exist, but that …

Go to article

Do Not Call: Abdicating And Ignoring Responsibility, Tim Searcy

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

I am not a lawyer, but for nearly a decade and a half, I have dealt with the issues that gave rise to the Federal Do Not Call Registry. Regardless of what you have read or seen, this issue did not just appear on the scene with the updating of the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule or the subsequent corollary changes made by the FCC in its rules implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). As a matter of fact, the original regulatory rulemaking by the FCC to implement the TCPA are over a decade old.

Go to article

Defendant’S Brief — Federal Trade Commission

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Plaintiff/petitioner telemarketers brought these actions challenging the FTC’s and FCC’s joint implementation of a nationwide do-not-call registry. The FTC created the registry as part of its Telemarketing Sales Rule. The Rule prohibits tele- marketers and sellers from calling phone numbers that consumers have listed on the registry. Subsequently, the FCC amended its rules implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227, to prohibit persons from mak- ing telephone solicitations to residential telephone subscribers who have registered their telephone numbers on the registry. Since June 27, 2003, when the registry opened, consumers have registered more than 50 million …

Go to article

Brief Of Amicus Curiae – American Association Of Retired Persons

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

AARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with more than 35 million members aged 50 and older. As the largest membership organization representing the interests of older Americans, AARP has a longstanding interest and involvement in combating telemarketing abuses and educating consumers about dealing with unwanted sales calls. While AARP’s concerns about telemarketing arose due to widespread fraudulent practices that targeted older persons (and those concerns continue), these initial concerns led to an expanded focus on effective means to reduce numerous, repeated intrusions into people’s homes by callers trying to sell myriad products and services. AARP thus has devoted significant resources …

Go to article

Telemarketing Sales Rule Comment For 16 Cfr Part 310 — American Association Of Retired Persons, David Certner

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

AARP appreciates this opportunity to comment on the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to amend the Telemarketing Sales Rule (the Rule). AARP’s interest in the Telemarketing Sales Rule and concerns about telemarketing abuses are long- standing. Seven years ago we were active participants in the original rulemaking proceeding. Since the adoption of the Rule in 1995, AARP has dedicated signi cant resources to educating consumers about telemarketing fraud and to working with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to combat it. We have also worked with state legislatures to enact state telemarketing legislation. The existing Rule …

Go to article

Telemarketing Sales Rule Commentary — Cox Enterprises, Inc.

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Cox Enterprises, Inc. (“CEI” or “Cox”) hereby submits these comments in response to the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking relating to the proposed amendment of the Telemarketing Sales Rule (the “TSR” or “Rule”). Cox welcomes this opportunity to comment on the proposed amended Rule, and strongly supports the efforts of the FTC to protect consumers from fraudulent and deceptive telemarketing.

Go to article

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Lee Hammond

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

My name is Lee Hammond and I am a member of AARP’s Board of Directors. On behalf of AARP and its thirty- ve million members, thank you for inviting us here this morning to discuss the importance of implementing and enforcing the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) national Do Not Call registry. AARP’s members have been among the millions of Americans who have taken the initiative to place their phone numbers into the Registry in an effort to reduce the amount of unwanted telemarketing calls. We share your indignation over recent court decisions to stymie this effort and we are here …

Go to article

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Timothy J. Muris

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

As you know, the Commission adopted the Registry as one of the amendments to the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) announced December 18, 2003, and formally promulgated in the Federal Register on January 29, 2003. On March 11, 2003, President Bush signed into law the Do Not Call Implementation Act (DNCIA), which provides for the FTC to collect fees from sellers and telemarketers to fund the establishment and maintenance of the National Do Not Call Registry. Congress enacted this legislation, and provided complementary appropriations, to support the FTC’s decision to establish such a Registry (conditioned on funding) as part of its …

Go to article

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Rodney Smolla

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

I wish to thank the Committee for this opportunity to present testimony on the issues implicated by recent judicial rulings concerning the national telemarketing “Do Not Call” registry, developed by both the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission.

Go to article

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Gerald Cerasale

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I thank you for the opportunity to appear before your Committee as it examines the issues surrounding the national Do-Not-Call Registry. I am Jerry Cerasale, Senior Vice President for The Direct Marketing Association, Inc. (“The DMA”).

Go to article

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Tim Searcy

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Senators, thank you for giving me this opportunity to testify before you today, on a matter of great importance to U.S. consumers, and business alike: the formation of a federal Do Not Call Registry. I am the Executive Director of the American Teleservices Association, which is the largest and only association dedicated exclusively to the interests of the teleservices industry. We are enjoying our twentieth anniversary this year, and represent approximately 650 rms involved in the teleservices industry. Our membership is tremendously diverse, and encompasses all aspects of telemarketing, customer service, market research, political calling, non- profit fundraising and technical …

Go to article

“Do-Not-Call List” Testimony: Before The House Committee On Energy And Commerce, Timothy J. Muris

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Mr. Chairman, I am Timothy J. Muris, Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission.1 I am pleased to appear today, on behalf of the Commission, to provide the Committee with information about our recently-announced amendments to the Telemarketing Sales Rule (“TSR” or “Rule”). In particular, you have asked about our request for authority to collect fees to offset the costs of implementing the “do-not-call” amendments to the TSR. Our testimony provides an overview of the TSR amendment process, discussion of the do-not-call provisions, and an examination of the funding request. The do-not-call registry is an important aspect of the Commission’s ongoing …

Go to article

Unleashing Instant Messaging From Regulatory Oversight, Fernando Laguarda

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

INTRODUCTION: { 1 } America Online, Inc. ("AOL") and Time Warner Inc. announced their intention to merge on January 10, 2000.' At that time, there was a great deal of excitement about combining these two companies and harnessing the power of an increasingly broadband Internet. In addition to the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") and Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"), more than one thousand local communities conducted their own reviews of the merger. The FTC identified "open access" to the Time Warner Cable platform as an issue meriting specific relief {2} The FCC, for its part, specifically identified "instant messaging" ("IM") as …

Go to article

Plaintiff’S Reply Brief — Mainstream Marketing Services, Inc., Tmg Marketing, Inc. And American Teleservices Association

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The government’s assumption that commercial speech restrictions should be judged by the same standard as time, place or manner restrictions fails to accurately set forth the relevant burden of proof articulated in more recent commercial speech cases.

Go to article

Brief Of Amicus Curiae — U.S. States

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

America is frustrated with telemarketing. To help individuals reclaim a measure of peace and privacy in their homes, the States and, later, the federal agencies had to step in. On behalf of the fifty-one million individuals who have registered on the national do-not-call (“DNC”) list, Amici Curiae California, Colorado, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, …

Go to article

Brief Of Amici Curiae – Representatives W.J. “Billy” Tauzin And John D. Dingell And Certain Other Members Of The House Of Representatives Of The United States

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

In 1995, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) promulgated telemarketing rules that prohibit “a seller or telemarketer [of goods or services] from calling a consumer who has previously asked not to be called by or on behalf of that seller.” Earlier this year, the FTC amended its rules to make it easier for consumers to avoid telemarketing calls. Under the revised rule, commonly known as the “Do Not Call” rule, individuals can choose to prohibit all commercial telemarketing calls to their homes or cellular phones, with a limited exception for calls made pursuant to an established business relationship. The revised FTC …

Go to article

Not If, But When?: Dismantling The Florida Adoption Act Of 2001, Andrew T. Binstock

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note critiques the notice provision of the Adoption Act of 2001, arguing that it unjustly required single mothers to publish personal details in newspapers, violating privacy rights under the Due Process Clause and the Florida Constitution. The provision was ultimately invalidated by the Fourth District Court of Appeals, reflecting a broader tension between protecting fathers' rights and safeguarding mothers' privacy. The legislature's repeal of the notice requirement and the establishment of a voluntary putative father registry marked a shift toward balancing these interests while respecting reproductive autonomy.

Go to article

Introduction: Contains Cover, Table Of Contents, Letter From The Editor, And Masthead, Edwin E. Wallis Iii

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

On behalf of the 2003-2004 Editorial Board, I would like to welcome you to the fourth issue of the Richmond Journal of Law & Technology’s 2003-2004 publication term! Issue 4 is the world’s rst collection of Do Not Call List materials compiled in a single law review issue. Issue 4 contains several preexisting materials, including Congressional testimony, party briefs, and amicus briefs for the Do Not Call List appeal before the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, in additional to original scholarly articles prepared speci cally for the Journal.

Go to article

Plaintiff’S Brief — Mainstream Marketing Services, Inc., Tmg Marketing, Inc. And American Teleservices Association

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

This case is a cautionary tale about what happens when federal agencies allow perceived political imperatives to override legal and constitutional concerns.

Go to article

Defendant’S Reply Brief — Federal Trade Commission

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The do-not-call registry is the product of concerted, measured efforts by Congress and two agencies over more than a decade. When Congress passed the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), it recognized that the nature and volume of unwanted telemarketing had created significant intrusions into residential privacy that individuals were powerless to combat. Congress authorized creation of a do-not-call registry at that time, but gave the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) latitude to consider other options, such as requiring telemarketers to keep their own do-not-call lists.

Go to article

Brief Of Amici Curiae — United States Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

This Amicus Curiae Brief is respectfully filed by the undersigned members of the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation (“Committee”). Acting in our capacity on behalf of the United States government, we may file this Brief pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 29(a). The Committee exercises oversight responsibility for both the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”). With the respect owed to a co-equal branch of government, we file this Brief to share with the Court our strongly-held views regarding the constitutional law issues in contest in this appeal and the vital public …

Go to article

Full-Text Articles in Communications Law

The Financial Implications Of The Une-Platform: A Review Of The Evidence, T. Randolph Beard, George S. Ford, Christopher Klein

CommLaw Conspectus: Journal of Communications Law and Technology Policy (1993-2015)

"Don't Let The Sun Go Down On Me:" An In-Depth Look At Opportunistic Business Method Patent Licensing And A Proposed Solution To Allow Small-Defendant Business Method Users To Sing A Happier Tune, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1359 (2004), Andrea Lynn Evensen

UIC Law Review

Cross Burning Revisited: What The Supreme Court Should Have Done In Virginia V. Black And Why It Didn’T, W. Wat Hopkins

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Play It Again, Sam: Webcasters’ Sound Recording Complement As An Unconstitutional Restraint On Free Speech, Amanda S. Reid

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Redefining The Transformative Use Of Copyrighted Works: Toward A Fair Use Standard In The Digital Environment, Jisuk Woo

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

But We Have To Protect Our Source: How Electronic Voting Companies' Proprietary Code Ruins Elections, Andrew Massey

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Holding The Spymasters Accountable After 9/11: A Proposed Model For Cia Disclosure Requirements Under The Freedom Of Information Act, Martin E. Halstuk

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Sharing And Stealing, Jessica Litman

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Picking Up The Pieces Of Grokster: A New Approach To File Sharing, Tom Graves

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Can The Right Of Publicity Afford Free Speech - A New Right Of Publicity Test For First Amendment Cases, Jason K. Levine

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

Do Not Call: Abdicating And Ignoring Responsibility, Tim Searcy

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Defendant’S Brief — Federal Trade Commission

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Brief Of Amicus Curiae – American Association Of Retired Persons

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Telemarketing Sales Rule Comment For 16 Cfr Part 310 — American Association Of Retired Persons, David Certner

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Telemarketing Sales Rule Commentary — Cox Enterprises, Inc.

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Lee Hammond

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Timothy J. Muris

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Rodney Smolla

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Gerald Cerasale

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

“Do-Not-Call-List” Testimony: Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation, Tim Searcy

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

“Do-Not-Call List” Testimony: Before The House Committee On Energy And Commerce, Timothy J. Muris

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Unleashing Instant Messaging From Regulatory Oversight, Fernando Laguarda

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Plaintiff’S Reply Brief — Mainstream Marketing Services, Inc., Tmg Marketing, Inc. And American Teleservices Association

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Brief Of Amicus Curiae — U.S. States

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Brief Of Amici Curiae – Representatives W.J. “Billy” Tauzin And John D. Dingell And Certain Other Members Of The House Of Representatives Of The United States

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Not If, But When?: Dismantling The Florida Adoption Act Of 2001, Andrew T. Binstock

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

Introduction: Contains Cover, Table Of Contents, Letter From The Editor, And Masthead, Edwin E. Wallis Iii

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Plaintiff’S Brief — Mainstream Marketing Services, Inc., Tmg Marketing, Inc. And American Teleservices Association

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Defendant’S Reply Brief — Federal Trade Commission

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Brief Of Amici Curiae — United States Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, And Transportation

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology