Tag Archives: copyright

U.S. Copyright Office, Section 512 Study Roundtable

Posted on April 8, 2019 by rtushnet

Opening Remarks Karyn A. Temple, Register of Copyrights and Director, U.S. Copyright Office Nat’l and int’l changes since 2016 roundtable—looking for updates.  [Congrats on her first official event as Register!]  Tale of two cities: very different perspectives on how DMCA … Continue reading →

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

Amazon case shows profound difference between DMCA safe harbor & 230 immunity

Posted on March 22, 2019 by rtushnet

Kangaroo Mfg. Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc., No. CV-17-01806-PHX-SPL, 2019 WL 1280945 (D. Ariz. Mar. 20, 2019) The Amazon Chronicles often asks “what is Amazon?”  An interesting question to build a law school course around might be “what can Amazon do?”  … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

ICANN and the New Top-Level Domains, panel 2

Posted on February 26, 2019 by rtushnet

ICANN and the New Top-Level Domains “Walled Gardens:” Should gTLDs Become Private Platforms? Becky Burr, ICANN Board & Neustar: We used to talk about .kids as a walled garden/moderated content for kids, a safe space. [Based on what we know … Continue reading →

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

Influencer’s laundry list complaint against PopSugar survives motion to dismiss

Posted on February 13, 2019 by rtushnet

Batra v. Popsugar, Inc., 2019 WL 482492, No. 18-cv-03752-HSG (N.D. Cal. Feb. 7, 2018) Batra sued Popsugar for removing the CMI of her photograph, infringing her copyright, violating her right of publicity, intentionally interfering with her contracts, engaging in false … Continue reading →

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

WIPIP 2019, University of Houston, Copyright panel

Posted on February 12, 2019 by rtushnet

Abandoning Copyrights, Aaron Perzanowski & Dave Fagundes: Unilateral transfer of rights. W/personal property you think about transfer to unknown but discrete third party, but in © abandoned rights are not up for grabs by some new claimant, but rather in … Continue reading →

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

Y/S/H Junior Faculty Forum, June 5-6 2019 Request for Submissions (including IP)

Posted on January 4, 2019 by rtushnet

Yale/Stanford/Harvard Junior Faculty Forum June 5-6, 2019, Yale Law School Yale, Stanford, and Harvard Law Schools announce the 20th session of the Junior Faculty Forum to be held at Yale Law School on June 5-6, 2019. The Forum’s objective is … Continue reading →

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

Y/S/H Junior Faculty Forum, June 5-6 2019 Request for Submissions (including IP)

Posted on January 4, 2019 by rtushnet

Yale/Stanford/Harvard Junior Faculty Forum June 5-6, 2019, Yale Law School Yale, Stanford, and Harvard Law Schools announce the 20th session of the Junior Faculty Forum to be held at Yale Law School on June 5-6, 2019. The Forum’s objective is … Continue reading →

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

IPSC plenary

Posted on August 11, 2018 by rtushnet

Tonya Evans, CryptoKitties, Cryptography, and Copyright Nonfungible digital creativity, enabled by the ERC 721 standard on the Ethereum blockchain: verifiable, indestructible digital scarcity.  NFTs overcome failures of existing digital structure for creators by providing for ownership, provenance, chain of title.  … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

IPSC session 6

Posted on August 11, 2018 by rtushnet

Session 6: Tort-Tinged IP Ben Depoorter (and Robert Walker), So Sue Me … Please! Reverse Nuisance in Intellectual Property Law Goldieblox case: filed declaratory judgment against Beastie Boys. Getting sued can sometimes be a boon and can bring a lot … Continue reading →

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

IPSC session 5

Posted on August 10, 2018 by rtushnet

Session 5: Copyright Michael Carroll, The Law of Musical Borrowing: A concept of © distinctiveness is implicit in how we talk about substantial similarity.  Who decides this? It’s supposed to be the consumer: ordinary observer/intended audience. Both TM and © … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment