Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

The Library Of Congress At A Crossroads: Executive Overreach And The Future Of Public Knowledge, Leslie A. Street, Amanda M. Runyon

Library Staff Publications

This Article argues that the removal of the Librarian of Congress and the Register of Copyrights exposed a dual vulnerability: a constitutional breach of the separation of powers and a cultural threat to the nation’s knowledge infrastructure. The Library’s structural ambiguity—its simultaneous identity as a legislative library, national library, and copyright agency—has left it vulnerable to executive overreach. By asserting control over an institution designed to serve Congress and safeguard America’s intellectual heritage, the President destabilized a statutory framework that has endured for over two centuries. To protect both constitutional integrity and the Library’s role as custodian of national memory, …

Designed Lands©Apes—Ar©Hitecture, Sculpture, Visual Art, Shape, Pi©Torial Work, Or . . . Nothing At All?, Richard H. Chused

Articles & Chapters

This article arises from the saga of the construction and eventual destruction of a landmark landscape architectural work by the well-known artist Mary Miss that was constructed adjacent to the Des Moines Art Center called Greenwood Pond: Double Site. The project’s demise is emblematic of the remarkably ambiguous copyright problems that surround such artistic creations. They do not neatly fit into any category of copyrightable works. Though they may contain sculptural works, their overall designs are rarely totally sculptural. While architects typically draw plans and “sculpt” a landscaped space, the results usually are not “buildings,’ as required by the definition …

Investigation Expenses, Ryan Vacca

Faculty Publications

Misappropriating trade secrets is usually done in secret. After all, those taking another’s trade secret in violation of state and federal law rarely openly tout their misdeeds. As a result, trade secret owners do not always immediately realize that their trade secret has been misappropriated and must spend significant resources investigating whether misappropriation has occurred and, if so, by whom and to what extent.

An important question frequently arising over the last several years but overlooked in the scholarly literature is whether a trade secret owner’s investigation expenses are recoverable as “actual loss” under state and federal trade secret laws. …

Campbell At 30: A Retrospective Appreciation, Michael W. Carroll, Peter Jaszi

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Article traces the intellectual history of copyright law’s fair use doctrine at the Supreme Court from its first encounter with fair use to its landmark decision slightly more than three decades ago in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. Campbell provided courts with a coherent, user-centered theory for applying the four statutory fair use factors provided under 17 U.S.C. § 107, a standard the Court recently ratified in Google LLC v. Oracle Am., Inc. and Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts v. Goldsmith. As one of three related articles, this Article advances two principal claims to contribute to …

A Conceptual Map Of The Right To Repair: Where Upcycling Fits In, Anthony D. Rosborough

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The chapter maps contemporary approaches to the Right to Repair along a spectrum from decentralised freedoms to centralised standard setting and product design. Decentralised approaches propose a Right to Repair that resembles a 'negative right' in that it protects user autonomy through dismantling legal and market barriers. Centralised repairability models, on the other hand, align more with a positive right that is built through stringent product design standards, obligations on manufacturers to repair products directly, and situate repair within larger circular economy governance models.

Using the US and EU approaches to Right to Repair policy as illustrative poles, the chapter …

Separation Of Copyright Powers, Blake Reid

Publications

The United States Copyright Office’s multifarious roles in the U.S. copyright system have long prompted uncertainty about its position among the branches of the federal government. From its formal home in the Library of Congress, the chameleonic Office has accumulated a wide range of advisory, rulemaking, adjudicative, and administrative functions that have long prompted questions about both agencies’ exercise of dueling legislative and executive powers.

Despite its increasingly sprawling portfolio and unusual configuration, the Office has never faced a serious separation-of-powers reckoning—until now. In the span of just five days in May 2025, Donald Trump fired the Librarian of Congress …

Fluid Agency In Ai Systems: A Case For Functional Equivalence In Copyright, Patent, And Tort, Anirban Mukherjee, Hannah H. Chang

Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business

Modern Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems exhibit fluid agency in multi-step workflows: lacking human-like consciousness or culpability, yet they display behavior that is (i) stochastic (probabilistic and path‑dependent), (ii) dynamic (co‑evolving with user interaction), and (iii) adaptive (able to reorient across contexts). These properties generate valuable outputs but collapse attribution, irreducibly entangling human and machine inputs. Doctrines that assume traceable provenance—authorship, inventorship, and liability—fracture under this unmappability, yielding ownership gaps and moral “crumple zones.”This Article argues that only functional equivalence stabilizes doctrine under unmappability: Where provenance is indeterminate, legal frameworks should treat human and AI contributions as equivalent for allocating rights …

Copyright Eligibility For Ai Works Under United States Law, Roger V. Skalbeck

Law Faculty Publications

This article examines copyright eligibility for works that incorporate generative AI elements under United States law, explaining that such works may be protected only to the extent they contain human-authored expression.  This expression can appear as creative selection, arrangement, editing, or other expressive contributions, while unedited or autonomously generated AI output is not copyrightable. The article highlights how the U.S. Copyright Office’s registration and review system, through disclosure requirements, refusals, and public registration records, creates meaningful evidence about boundaries of copyright protection for AI-assisted works. The article contrasts this U.S. registration framework with other legal systems, including European jurisdictions such …

Virtual Influencers, Real Liability: Strategies For Companies To Ensure Consumer Protection When Using Ai Influencers, Sherri Hufstedler

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

When You Wish Upon A Clause, Hannah Lee

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

Fair Use Or Foul Play? Copyright Law’S Battle Over Using Sound Recordings In Ai Training, Matthew Schurz

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

How Slow Legislative Reform Allows For Fake News, The Remedies And Solutions To Modernize The Law, Christopher Kidwell

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

Masthead

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

Did Anderson V. Tiktok Get It Right? Holding Social Media Providers Accountable For Harm To Adolescents, Allison Mitton

BYU Law Review

When dangerous social media challenges go viral and cause harm to adolescents and young children, should the platform be held liable for pushing that content? As it currently stands, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1934 prevents this from happening. However, Anderson v. TikTok—a recent suit brought on behalf of a ten-year-old girl who died after asphyxiating herself while participating in the viral “Blackout Challenge”—seeks to change that.

The Third Circuit court in Anderson held that social media algorithms should be considered first-party speech, or the platform’s own expressive activity, rather than third-party speech, displaying its users’ expressive …

The Enduring Value Of Copyright Harmonization, Stefania Fusco

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Discovering Melodies Or Discovering Lawsuits? Why The Discovery Rule Is Increasingly Inapplicable To Copyright Infringement As The War Over Generative Ai Wages On, Jack Pilon

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Function Over Form: Why Wipo's Procedural Treaties Are Not Enough, Cassidy Serger

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Design Law Is Taking Shape In The United States And European Union, Christine Haight Farley

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Essay uses a comparative framework to show that sophisticated design rights holders in both the United States (U.S.) and the European Union (EU) increasingly sidestep specialized design regimes in favor of more expansive trademark and copyright doctrines. Although both jurisdictions now operate cumulative intellectual property (IP) systems for industrial design, they have taken sharply divergent paths in confronting the proliferation of “design dupes”—replicas that trade on the appeal of sought-after designs. In the United States, rights holders rely chiefly on trademark law, and especially trade dress, to convert cultural recognition into legally cognizable source indication, a move facilitated by …

The Double Patenting Puzzle, Michael Risch

Faculty Publications

It’s a simple rule: one patent per invention. This is easy to enforce when patent claims in two patents are identical, but what if the second patent claims something close but not quite the same? For more than 150 years, courts have held that obvious improvements over the prior art cannot be patented. But when inventors seek a small improvement in their own follow-on patents, there may not be any prior art because the law does not typically count inventors’ work against themselves. Inventors can include two similar claims in the same patent without objection, but if they split them …

A Leap Of Good Faith: Intent Requirements In Trademark Applications Across Major Markets, Maximillian Scott Matiauda

University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

This Article examines how four major trademark regimes—the United Kingdom, United States, China, and European Union—define and regulate bad-faith trademark applications. It traces the historical and legislative foundations of intent-to-use doctrines, compares contemporary statutory frameworks and judicial interpretations, and evaluates pivotal developments such as the U.K. Supreme Court’s SkyKick ruling and China’s ongoing trademark reforms. Although the jurisdictions employ distinct legal tools, the Article finds a converging emphasis on curbing opportunistic or abusive filings. The Article ultimately advocates for greater international alignment in articulating and enforcing good-faith standards within trademark law.