Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons^™

Can Chatgpt And The Like Be Your Co-Authors?, Hadar Y. Jabotinsky, Michal Lavi

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

On November 30, 2022, OpenAI released an AI based chatbot called ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer). This AI system uses natural language processing (NLP) techniques to generate written text by learning the patterns and structures of natural language. ChatGPT is a versatile chatbot with the ability to write speeches, news articles, and essays either wholly or partially. Some users acknowledge ChatGPT as a co-author of the generated text, while others only acknowledge its use in writing the document. In fact, this issue became so pressing in academia that Springer Nature, the world's largest academic publisher, announced that software like ChatGPT cannot …

What Happens When The Conflicts Of Interest Board Does Not Prevent Conflicts? Examining New York City Charter Chapter 68, Abigail Damsky

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note critiques the New York Board's advisory opinion on elected officials' use of personal social media accounts, arguing that it contravenes Chapter 68 and Board Rule Section 113 by allowing the use of city resources for political gain, undermining government integrity, and creating transparency issues under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). The analysis advocates for revising the advisory opinion to align with existing ethical standards and ensure accountability.

Service Of Process Via Nft Airdrops: The Pathway To Private Litigation For Injured Web3 Plaintiffs, Sophia Dudgeon

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note explores the evolving landscape of legal process in the digital age, focusing on the use of blockchain technology and NFTs for serving legal notices. It argues that courts are increasingly adapting traditional due process principles, such as those established in Mullane v. Alabama, to accommodate emerging technologies. The analysis highlights the landmark case LCX AG v. 1.274M U.S. Dollar Coin, where a court approved serving process via NFT airdrop, demonstrating how technological innovations can enhance access to justice in digital asset disputes. The author advocates for courts to embrace expansive interpretations of alternative service methods to …

Table Of Contents - Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, Vol. 42, Iss. 3

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Introductory Remarks, Carly Rothstein

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

This introductory remark explores the implications of recent Supreme Court decisions in Bad Spaniels and Andy Warhol on intellectual property law, focusing on the evolving landscape of copyright and trademark protections. It highlights the challenges and opportunities these rulings present for balancing artistic expression, cultural norms, and legal frameworks. The symposium serves as a platform for scholars and practitioners to discuss these developments and their broader impact on IP law and policy.

Panel 1: Copyright Law, Michael W. Carroll, Peter Karol, Christopher Sprigman, Jacob Noti-Victor

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The Warhol v. Goldsmith case has reshaped the interpretation of fair use in copyright law, emphasizing market competition and the commercial purpose of the use. The Supreme Court's decision focused on the commercial licensing of Warhol's work, highlighting the importance of assessing whether the use competes with the original work's market. This shift could influence future cases, particularly in technology and art, by potentially altering how transformative use and market competition are evaluated.

Panel 2: Trademark Law, Stacey Dogan, Christine Haight Farley, Jessica Silbey, Rebecca Tushnet, Felix Wu

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Why Courts Should Not Interpret The Meaning Of Art, Amy Adler

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article argues that courts are ill-equipped to interpret the meaning of art, particularly in fair use cases, as seen in the Supreme Court's decision in Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith. The Court's reliance on determining the meaning of art exacerbates confusion and inconsistency in fair use jurisprudence, highlighting the need for alternative approaches that avoid judicial interpretation of artistic meaning.

Why The Supreme Court Rejected The Prospect Theory Of Copyright Scope, Michael W. Carroll

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

In Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. ("Google v. Oracle"), and again in Andy Warhol Found. for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith ("Warhol"), the parties and various amici presented the Court with a variety of arguments about the relationship between a copyright owner's right to make derivative works from a protected work and a user's right to make fair uses of that same work. At bottom, these arguments were about the proper, or even optimal, scope of copyright.

This Essay argues that these arguments were instead grounded in a form of "prospect theory" of copyright scope that …

Trademark Fair Use Is No Joke, Christine Haight Farley

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article critiques the Supreme Court's decision in Jack Daniel's Properties v. VIP Products, arguing that the Court missed an opportunity to clarify the relationship between trademark law and the First Amendment. While the Court acknowledged the importance of protecting parodies, it failed to develop a comprehensive framework for balancing trademark rights with free speech. Instead, it introduced a narrow rule that limits the application of the Rogers test, potentially undermining speech protections in trademark disputes. The article contends that the Court's reliance on the likelihood of confusion test is insufficient to address the broader First Amendment implications of …

What Recent Scrutiny Surrounding New Jersey's Newborn Screening Program Is Missing: Comment On The Reproductive And Social Justice Issues The Program Illuminates, Dylan Blanchard

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note critiques New Jersey's Newborn Screening Program, highlighting its constitutional and social justice implications. While the program is a vital public health measure, its retention of newborn blood samples without informed consent and subsequent use by law enforcement raises significant Fourth Amendment concerns. The analysis argues that the program disproportionately impacts minorities and perpetuates systemic racism in the criminal legal system, as biometric data from these samples can be used to bypass probable cause requirements.

Masthead, Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, Vol. 43 (2024-25)

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Why The Supreme Court Rejected The Prospect Theory Of Copyright Scope, Michael W. Carroll

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. (“Google v. Oracle”), and again in Andy Warhol Found. for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith (“Warhol”), the parties and various amici presented the Court with a variety of arguments about the relationship between a copyright owner's right to make derivative works from a protected work and a user's right to make fair uses of that same work. At bottom, these arguments were about the proper, or even optimal, scope of copyright. This Essay argues that these arguments were instead grounded in a form of ““prospect theory” of copyright scope that would give …

Would Jackie Robinson Play Baseball Today? How Baseball Owners Conspire To Restrain Trade And Foster Unequal Opportunities For Player Development, Stephen Ross

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez

Seattle University Law Review

The Roberts Court holds a well-earned reputation for overturning Supreme Court precedent regardless of the long-standing nature of the case. The Roberts Court knows how to overrule precedent. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), the Court’s majority opinion never intimates that it overrules Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court’s leading opinion permitting race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Instead, the Roberts Court applied Grutter as authoritative to hold certain affirmative action programs entailing racial preferences violative of the Constitution. These programs did not provide an end point, nor did they require assessment, review, periodic expiration, or revision for greater …

Forget About Ferpa: How Foia Protects Student-Athlete Privacy In The Nil Era, Kamron Cox

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The start of the name, image, and likeness (NIL) era stirred public fervor about the new earning potential of high-profile student-athletes. Since institutional policies and state laws governing NIL require student-athletes to broadly disclose information about their NIL activities to their respective institutions, the several state laws that follow the approach of the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) can jeopardize the privacy of student-athlete NIL information. Major universities have repeatedly resorted to the unreliable defense of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act as well as sporadic state legislation to protect student-athlete privacy in the new NIL space. However, …

Breaking Cultural And Financial Barriers In Olympic Sports, Maureen A. Weston, Professor Of Law

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Nelson Mandela has said that “[s]port has the power to change the world. It has the power to inspire. It has the power to unite people in a way that little else does . . . . It is more powerful than governments in breaking down barriers.” Sports can have tremendous value, not only to the individual participants in promoting physical and mental health, skills, and teamwork, but also to society in fostering community, civic pride, and a sense of belonging, even among the fans. Sports have significant economic, political and cultural impacts at the local, national, and international spheres. …

Protecting The Innocent: How To Prevent The Consequences Of Misidentification And Doxing By Volunteers Helping With Open Source Investigations, Leigh M. Dannhauser

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

Individuals performing open source investigations can misidentify alleged perpetrators and dox innocent parties online, which can subsequently lead to threats and harassment against innocent parties and their loved ones. For example, threats were made against Sunil Tripathi’s family after he was wrongly identified as one of the Boston Marathon bombers and doxed on Reddit and Twitter. In 2020, the Berkeley Protocol on Digital Open Source Investigations was published as a guide, and it includes a set of principles to govern open source investigations. However, the Berkeley Protocol is limited to open source investigations performed by those working for organizations. It …

Hollywood's Triple Threat: Writers, Actors, And Antitrust Regulators Take On The Streaming Giants, Remy S. Farkas

American University Business Law Review

In the summer of 2023, Hollywood froze when actors, writers, and crew took to the picket lines. Their gripe: the recent mega mergers by media conglomerates. The Writers Guild Association and Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists joined forces to protest recent acquisitions by Disney, Amazon, and Netflix; these companies vertically integrated within the industry, which allowed them to exploit workers, limit content, and raise prices for consumers. In the same summer, the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission released Draft Merger Guidelines, which included thirteen new guidelines for evaluating whether a merger violates antitrust …

The Ncaa's Challenge In Determining Nil Market Value, Meg Penrose

Faculty Scholarship

This Article proceeds in three parts. Part II discusses the changes that NIL has wrought in college athletics. It briefly explains collectives and their impact on NIL. Part III discusses the impossibility of limiting athletes’ “fair market value” given market value depends on what the market is willing to pay. Congress has failed to pass national legislation. Yet the mosaic of state laws is simply unfit to stand in for national legislation. And, following multiple litigation losses, the NCAA cannot be trusted to “value” the athletes themselves. Market value, if one is to be established, must be uniform and assessed …