Columbia University has been at the center of the growing conversation about campus life and sexual assault in the past year, and now is the target of a new lawsuit by a student accused of misconduct. The case spotlights the collision between free expression and disparagement and the often uneasy balance between them. It also raises some questions about the level of intimate detail included in the documents in a case that is not actually about that conduct, but rather about an educational atmosphere. Nothing in the following article should be read as an adoption of any particular version of events.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: sexual assault, Jon Kessler, Columbia University, Mattress Performance/Carry That Weight, Performance Art, Title IX, Paul Nungesser, motion to strike, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Litigation, university disciplinary board, First Amendment, U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Right, The Mattress Performance, Emma Sulkowicz
I was pleasantly surprised to learn today that Above the Law had published an article entitled “The 12 Awesome Law Blogs of 2014,” and right there at Number 1 was none other than the Art Law Report. As Colin O’Keefe and Cara McDonald wrote:
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: the Auto Industry Blog, Retail Law Advisor, Trademarkology, Bob Law’s Law Blog, Stites & Harbison, Nazi-looted art in Munich, Walker O’Neill, ownership intellectual property, authentication, the Goulston & Storrs Retail Group, Above the Law, Gray Reed & McGraw P.C., Gurlitt Collection, BeLabor the Point, Covington & Burling LLP, R-T Specialty LLC, Charles Sartain, art, Canna Law Blog, Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Stit, the Art Law Report, Gurlitt, Restitution, Canna Law, David Smyth, Kevin LaCroix, Colin O'Keefe, Goulston & Storrs, Cady Bar the Door, First Amendment, Hilary Bricken, The D&O Diary, Jim Walker, Cruise Law News, Harris Moure, Foley & Lardner, 12 Awesome Law Blogs of 2014, Brooks Pierce, Inside Privacy, Cara McDonald, Energy and the Law
Fresh on the heels of accepting en banc review of the appeal over the constitutionality of the California Resale Royalties Act, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to rehear Google’s appeal of the injunction against it after actress Cindy Lee Garcia claimed a protectable copyright in her performance of “Innocence of Muslims.” While, as before, one should hesitate to read too much into the mere fact of en banc review, the three-judge panel under review now stands a good chance of being overturned (as it should).
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Copyright Act, en banc, Libya, Youssef, YouTube, Innocence of Muslims, prior restraint, 17 U.S.C. § 106, Copyright, First Amendment, Cindy Lee Garcia, Fair Use, Google, Benghazi, work for hire
Much ink has been spilled over the new world order seemingly announced by last year’s Second Circuit decision in Prince v. Cariou with regard to copyright, fair use, appropriation art, and “transformativeness.” In a nutshell, while roundly criticized, most commentators have taken the Prince decision to announce the apotheosis of “transformativeness” among the fair use factors in § 107 of the Copyright Act. Prince looked at the four statutory factors and applied them in such a way that to be considered “transformative” was to qualify for fair use. Most troubling was the “know it when you see it” character of the opinion. The Google Books opinions took a similar view.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Richard Prince, Cheshire Cat, Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §106, Seventh Circuit, Prince v. Cariou, Mifflin Street Block Party, Google Books, Campbell v. Acuff Rose, Wisconsin, Sorry for partying, Madison, Copyright, Kienitz v. Sconnie Nation LLC, Judge Frank Easterbrook, First Amendment, transformativeness, Fair Use, mayor Paul Soglin, 17 U.S.C. §107
For students following the various issues we cover here, there is an exciting opportunity next winter. Registration is now open for DePaul University College of Law’s 2015 National Cultural Heritage Law Moot Court Competition in Chicago on February 27-28, 2015. The competition is open to twenty-six two- and three-member student teams from ABA-accredited or provisionally accredited law schools. Schools may register up to two teams.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: National Cultural Heritage Law Moot Court Competit, Moral Rights, Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990, VARA, Morag Kersel, 17 U.S.C. § 106A, Copyright, Lubna El-Gendi, First Amendment, Depaul Center for Art Museum & Cultural Herita, Patty Gerstenblith, Fifth Amendment
As anyone with a computer now knows, the story broke last week of a supposed cache of hundreds of intimate photographs of numerous celebrities, including Kate Upton and Jennifer Lawrence, and Detroit Tigers pitcher Justin Verlander. Over the course of the week, rumors circulated about who, exactly, had them, and whether or where they would be leaked online. The story also raised important questions about privacy, security, and default cloud storage of which many people were simply unaware.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: The Showroom, Richard Prince, U.S. Copyright Office, reddit, rights of publicity, Second Circuit, No Delete, Canal Zone, Jennifer Lawrence, Patrick Cariou, Florida, Detroit Tigers, Yes Rasta, Saint Petersburg, Jeff Hamilton, Kate Upton, Cory Allen Contemporary Art, selfie, photo hack, Justin Verlander, XVALA, Copyright, First Amendment, Fair Use, Warehouse Arts District, Art Law Report
Last year, the Ninth Circuit stood out amongst fair use decisions in its opinion in Seltzter v. Green Day, particularly in contrast to what has persuasively been dubbed the Second Circuit’s "know it when we see it" approach to transformativeness as annunciated in the Cariou v. Prince decision. By contrast, the potentially destabilizing effect of the Ninth Circuit’s highest profile copyright case in 2014 can scarcely be overstated. Unless and until the full court reverses a three-judge panel in Garcia v. Google, Inc., nearly every motion picture will be in peril of "infringement." The consequences for the First Amendment and for free expression would be devastating. Although it was not raised, expect fair use to come into play if the decision stands and the case heads back to the trial court. The film is clearly transformative precisely because the plaintiff argues that her performance was unknowingly changed in service of a message she found offensive.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Walter Sobchak, Copyright Act, Feist, Prince v. Cariou, Libya, Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA, Youssef, YouTube, Innocence of Muslims, Green Day, Seltzter v. Green Day, Nothing Compares 2 U, prior restraint, 17 U.S.C. § 106, Cindy Garcia, Copyright, Prince, First Amendment, Google, Sinead O’Connor, Benghazi, work for hire
Last night was a fascinating evening at the Sotheby’s Institute in New York, where Judith Prowda was celebrating the launch of her new book Visual Arts and the Law (Lund Humphries 2013). The book, not at all incidentally, is a must-have.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: free speech, Richard Prince, Amy Adler, Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Judith Prowda, Canal Zone, Patrick Cariou, Lund Humphries, Boies Schiller, American Society of Media Photographers, Yes Rasta, Kirkland & Ellis, NYU Law School, Events, Picture Archive Council of America, Shepard Fairey, Dale Cendali, Copyright, Hope, Visual Arts and the Law, transformative, First Amendment, Associated Press, Sotheby’s Institute, Fair Use
The New York Court of Appeals has rejected the must-watched effort by Nite Moves, a Albany-area strip club, to exempt itself from sales tax on the grounds that exotic dancing was protectable First Amendment expression. The high court ruled that the club failed to carry its burden to prve that the dances were “choreographed performances.” The quote of the day, however, goes to the dissent:
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: First Amendment
