Category Archives: Uncategorized

YouTube’s terms of service/content policies aren’t commercial advertising or promotion

Posted on March 2, 2020 by rtushnet

Prager Univ. v. Google LLC, No. 18-15712 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2020) YouTube isn’t a public forum and didn’t engage in false advertising by telling users it supported freedom of expression. Prager “University” (it’s not) complained that YT was discriminating … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Trademark Scholars Roundtable, Stanford part 3

Posted on March 2, 2020 by rtushnet

Session 3: Remedies in Trademark and Unfair Competition Cases   Introduction: Mark Lemley, Leah Chan Grinvald Discussant: Laura Heymann, Eric Goldman   [I had another conference in the morning so came in late.] Discussion of eBay’s effects. Burrell: In other … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Trademark Scholars Roundtable, Stanford part 2

Posted on March 2, 2020 by rtushnet

Session 2: A Forward-Looking Perspective   To what extent should trademark or unfair competition law reflect consumer expectations or seek to shape or set them? Introduction: Rebecca Tushnet One consideration in how we should structure the regime is that casual … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Trademark Scholars Roundtable, Stanford

Posted on March 2, 2020 by rtushnet

Trademark Scholars Roundtable Session 1: The Current Framework   To what extent does current trademark or unfair competition law reflect consumer expectations or seek to shape or set them? Introduction: Stacey Dogan Categorize rules as norm shaping v. norm following. … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Amicus brief in Warhol v. Goldsmith

Posted on February 28, 2020 by rtushnet

Working with Chris Bavitz and the Cyberlaw Clinic, I drafted a law professors’ brief on the issue of substantial similarity as a ground for affirming the district court. Drawing on Jeanne Fromer’s presentation on memes and copyright: from Blogger https://ift.tt/2VCGLBf

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

DOJ 230 workshop part 4

Posted on February 24, 2020 by rtushnet

DOJ Section 230 Roundtable, afternoon Chatham House Rules Session 1: Content Moderation, Free Speech, and Conduct Beyond Speech How do platforms deal w/defamation? Standard practice is to review the complaint, the content; compare to TOS/code of conduct. Removal if warranted, … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

DOJ 230 workshop part 3

Posted on February 24, 2020 by rtushnet

Panel 3: Imagining the Alternative The implications on competition, investment, and speech of Section 230 and proposed changes.     Moderator: Ryan Shores, Associate Deputy Attorney General Professor Eric Goldman, Santa Clara University: (c)(1) means no liability for 3d party content. Difference … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

DOJ 230 workshop part 2

Posted on February 24, 2020 by rtushnet

Panel 2: Addressing Illicit Activity Online Whether Section 230 encourages or discourages platforms to address online harms, such as child exploitation, revenge porn, and terrorism, and its impact on law enforcement. Moderator: The Honorable Beth A. Williams, Assistant Attorney General … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

DOJ 230 workshop

Posted on February 24, 2020 by rtushnet

Section 230 – Nurturing Innovation or Fostering Unaccountability? DOJ Workshop These are copied from my handwritten notes, so will likely be terser than usual. Introduction of the Attorney General The Honorable Christopher Wray, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation Tech is … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

They chose unwisely: court blows another hole in Rogers by refusing to say that explicit means explicit

Posted on February 19, 2020 by rtushnet

Chooseco LLC v. Netflix, Inc., No. 2:19-cv-08 (D. Vt. Feb. 11, 2020) Explicit doesn’t mean explicit in yet another sign of the pressure the Rogers test is under.  Chooseco sued Netflix for infringement (etc.) of its rights in Choose Your … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment