Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

The “Rootkit Debacle”: The Latest Chapter In The Story Of The Recording Industry And The War On Music Piracy, Megan M. La Belle

Scholarly Articles

In the age of digital music, illicit copying or burning of CDs is a rampant problem that undermines the rights of copyright holders, record labels, and artists alike. The recording industry has attempted to address this problem by manufacturing and releasing CDs with various types of digital rights management (DRM) technologies. Most recently, Sony BMG introduced CDs containing DRM software that was intended, among other things, to limit the number of copies of the CD the user could make, and prevent the user from sharing the content of the CD on peer-to-peer networks. However, the manner in which this software …

Scuffling For A Slice Of The Ringtone Pie: Evaluating Legal And Business Approaches To Copyright Clearance Issues, Carmen K. Yuen

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

A cell phone goes off, but instead of "Brring," you hear the disco swirls of ABBA's "Money, Money, Money." The tune is rather revealing about the potential of the U.S. ringtone market. Consumers are enjoying an increased selection of MP3-quality ringtones, but the music industry is grappling with a host of legal complications. The new ringtone format is unprecedented, and copyright law offers little clarification on which royalties are due to whom. As a result, labels, publishers, ringtone companies and performing rights organizations are avoiding litigation, and negotiating innovative deals instead. Are private business solutions enough to resolve the ringtone …

Creative Industries In Developing Countries And Intellectual Property Protection, Lauren Loew

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

International intellectual property law (hereafter referred to as IP law) has an increasingly important significance for international trade and relations. From the music industry to the drug industry, intellectual property is a lucrative market, and both individuals and corporations have a lot to lose from the infringement of intellectual property rights. For example, music is a $40 billion worldwide industry. According to the Recording Industry Association of American (RIAA), the music industry loses approximately $4.2 billion each year to worldwide piracy. Although these facts bring to light the economic losses of industries and individuals from IP infringement, the global community …

Cracks In The Great Wall: Why China's Copyright Law Has Failed To Prevent Piracy Of American Movies Within Its Borders, Jordana Cornish

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This note examines the current state of China's intellectual property rights protection as it relates to movie piracy. Part I examines the different types of film piracy occurring in China and the current severity of the problem for the United States motion picture industry. Part II traces the history of copyright law in China and examines China's commitments under the international copyright treaties it has signed with the United States and other nations through its recent accession to the WTO. Part III discusses why movie piracy in China is still on the rise despite these commitments and highlights why cultural, …

D.I.Y. After Dastar: Protecting Creators' Moral Rights Through Creative Lawyering, Individual Contracts And Collectively Bargained Agreements, Rick Mortensen

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Part I examines the scope of Dastar and argues that it is sufficiently narrow to permit some false attribution claims based on section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. As support, Part I examines district court cases after Dastar as well as pre-Dastar attribution cases that are still arguably good law. Part II examines the Second Circuit case of Gilliam v. ABC, Inc., in which the Monty Python comedy troupe successfully enjoined ABC from showing a mutilated copy of its work, as a model for pursuing right of integrity claims. Part II will show that this case is still good law, …

Distinctly Delineated Fictional Characters That Constitute The Story Being Told: Who Are They And Do They Deserve Independent Copyright Protection?, Jasmina Zecevic

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Part I of this paper discusses the characteristics that make literary characters especially difficult to protect. Part II describes the historical treatment of literary characters and the two main tests used to determine whether they are entitled to independent copyright protection. Part III demonstrates that the two tests currently used are not adequate tools for determining when copyright law protects literary characters. Part IV explores the possibility of using trademark and unfair competition laws to offer partial protection to fictional characters. Part V presents an argument that literary characters do not need independent protection because they are already sufficiently protected …

Patent Law Viewed Through An Evidentiary Lens: The "Suggestion Test" As A Rule Of Evidence, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

The Federal Circuit's recent nonobviousness jurisprudence has been the subject of much criticism. Reports from the Federal Trade Commission and the National Research Council and a pending petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court all conclude that the Federal Circuit has improperly relaxed the nonobviousness standard. Most of this criticism focuses on the Federal Circuit's implementation of part of the nonobviousness inquiry - the suggestion test. The suggestion test queries whether a suggestion to make the invention existed before the invention's creation. The Federal Circuit allegedly requires a suggestion to come solely from prior art references. The court ignores other …

Refusals To Deal With Competitors By Owners Of Patents And Copyrights: Reflections On The Image Technical And Xerox Decisions, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

Under the patent and copyright laws, the owner of a patent for an invention or of a copyright for a work has the right to sell, license or transfer it, to exploit it individually and exclusively, or even to decide to withhold it from the public. By contrast, under the antitrust laws, a unilateral refusal to deal may constitute an element of a violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, and the courts may then impose a duty on the violator to deal with others, including possibly with its actual or would-be competitors.

The central question addressed by this …

The Grokster Dead-End, Bryan H. Choi

Publications

No abstract provided.

Tax Strategies Are Not Patentable Inventions, Andrew A. Schwartz

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Secret Life Of Legal Doctrine: The Divergent Evolution Of Secondary Liability In Trademark And Copyright Law, Mark Bartholomew, John Tehranian

Journal Articles

The recent explosion in intellectual property litigation has witnessed increasing recourse to secondary liability theories. The courts have responded favorably to plaintiffs by enunciating substantial reinterpretations of extant principles, thereby precipitating a veritable secondary liability revolution. Numerous commentators have bemoaned this trend, contending that judicial recasting of liability rules expands intellectual property rights beyond their intended scope, thereby resulting in an overprotective regime that stifles innovation. Yet one of the most striking aspects of the secondary liability revolution has been all but ignored in the literature: While the courts have broadened the scope of secondary liability principles with respect to …

The Rehnquist Court And The Groundwork For Greater First Amendment Scrutiny Of Intellectual Property, Mark P. Mckenna

Journal Articles

This contribution to the Washington University School of Law conference on the Rehnquist Court and the First Amendment addresses the Rehnquist Court's view of the role of the First Amendment in intellectual property cases. It argues that, while the Rehnquist Court was not eager to find a conflict between intellectual property laws and the First Amendment, there is reason to believe that it set the stage for greater First Amendment scrutiny of intellectual property protections. At the very least, the Court left that road open to future courts, which might be inclined to view intellectual property more skeptically.