Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons^™

Warning: Wearing Eyeglasses May Subject You To Additional Liability And Other Foibles Of Post-Diana Newsgathering: An Analysis Of California’S Civil Code Section 1708.8, David A. Browde

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Brooklyn Institute Of Arts And Sciences V. City Of New York: The Death Of The Subsidy And The Birth Of The Entitlement In Funding Of The Arts, Danielle E. Caminiti

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The ‘Enticing Images’ Doctrine: An Emerging Principle In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Clay Calvert

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Food For The Lions: Excessive Damages For Newsgathering Torts And The Limitations Of Current First Amendment Doctrines , Andrew B. Sims

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Political Campaign Spending Caps And The First Amendment: Buckley V. Valeo Revisited, Wayne Barrett, Edward W. Hayes, Erik Joerss, William G. Kastin

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

What’S Wrong With This Picture? When The Lanham Act Clashes With Artistic Expression, Tara J. Goldsmith

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Panel Ii: Indecency On The Internet: Constitutionality Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996, Perry Aftab, Preeta D. Bansal, Theodore C. Hirt, Chris Hansen

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Panel I: Accountability Of The Media In Investigations, Gregg Jarrett, Charles E. Rose, Randall J. Turk, L. Lin Wood

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Panel Iii: Current Status Of Time Warner V. City Of New York, David B. Goldin, Robert D. Joffe, Robert T. Perry, Ned H. Rosenthal

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And Fcc Rule Making Under The 1992 Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the First Amendment implications of the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) regulations issued under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 19921 (1992 Cable Act). The 1992 Cable Act imposes numerous requirements that are beyond the scope of this Article. This Article analyzes only the FCC's exercise of rule making discretion under the 1992 Cable Act.

Additionally, it must be remembered that an under-staffed FCC was given an enormous amount of work to do within fixed time limits. Therefore, it must be expected that the rulemaking would be vulnerable to second-guessing. Nonetheless, whenever a governmental entity …

Panel On The Indecency Standard And Regulation Of And By The Media, William J. Small, Irving Gastfreund, Carlton Long, Robert W. Peters, Judith P. Phil[Ips

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Copyrighting Newscasts: An Argument For An Open Market, Michael W. Baird

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And The Media: Controversial Issues In The 1990s Program Schedule And Introduction, Editorial Board

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Impact Of The Media On Fair Trial Rights: Panel On Protection Of Reporters’ Sources, Hugh C. Hansen, Martin B. Adelman, Mark A. Conrad, George Freeman, Nicholas J. Jollymore, Arnold H. Lubasch, William A. Rome

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Judicial Panel: The Special Role Of The Judiciary In Protecting First Amendment Freedoms, John D. Feerick, Kenneth Conboy, John F. Keenan, Edward M. Rappaport

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Impact Of The Media On Fair Trial Rights: Panel On Media Access, James C. Goodale, Abraham Abramovsky, Helman R. Brook, James A. Cohen, George Freeman, David A. Schulz, Carolyn Schurr

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tort Liability For Physical Injuries Allegedly Resulting From Media Speech: A Comprehensive First Amendment Approach , Andrew B. Sims

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Ward V. Rock Against Racism: How Time, Place And Manner Further Restrict The Public Forum, Michael B. Manley

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Arts Funding At What Cost? The Impact Of Funding Guidelines On The First Amendment And The Future Of Art In America, Anne L. Body

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Free Press-Fair Trial Conflict–What's A Lawyer To Say?, C. Evan Stewart

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Cable Traffic And The First Amendment Must-Carry Under A Diversity Approach And Antitrust As Possible Alternative, Bruno Vandermeulen

LLM Theses and Essays

Recent technological progress in the field of telecommunications has greatly changed the competitive structure between broadcasters, cable operators, and telephone companies. The legal and economic environment for these media participants has shifted, and new problems have arisen. One major problem is the enhanced threat of concentration of media corporations, as corporate bigness becomes desirable and the number of diversified owners of media outlets continues to decrease. This paper analyzes broadcasting regulations and subsequent case law to show the concern by the legislature and regulatory agencies to preserve diversity in opinion and media-ownership through emphasis on “localism” and a “marketplace of …

The First Amendment And The Cable Television Operator: An Unprotective Shield Against Public Access Requirements, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article focuses on the question of whether state-imposed public access requirements violate the First Amendment rights of the cable television operator. The author suggests that the appropriate analysis asks whether the law abridges expression the First Amendment was meant to protect. In other words, do cable access requirements abridge speech safeguarded by the First Amendment? The article demonstrates that such requirements do not hinder, but in fact further, fundamental First Amendment interests. Finally, the article shows that access requirements fulfill the standards of the constitutional tests for each classification into which they could be placed.