Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Comments on UNBUNDLING THE “TORT” OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT by Patrick R. Goold Prof. Matthew Sag Loyola University School of Law.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Comments on UNBUNDLING THE “TORT” OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT by Patrick R. Goold Prof. Matthew Sag Loyola University School of Law."— Presentation transcript:

1 Comments on UNBUNDLING THE “TORT” OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT by Patrick R. Goold Prof. Matthew Sag Loyola University School of Law

2 Table 1: Analytical Features of Copy-Torts Consumer Copying Competitor Copying Expressive Privacy Invasion Artistic Reputation Injury Creative Control Legally Protected Interest Charging consumers a fee for some uses Confidentiality Artistic reputation Control Legal Wrong Copying to make a protected use. Copying causing demand diversion Publishing Copying causing to reputational injury Making use without consent Conduct or Outcome- Responsibility CR: Copying for certain uses triggers liability OR: Copying must cause diversion. CR: Publishing triggers liability. OR: Copying must cause reputational injury CR: Decision making triggers liability. Appropriate Analogy Trespass to Land Unfair Competition Publication of Private Facts False Light /Defamation Conversion

3 Insight #1 Copyright rights are not absolute Disaggregating copyright infringement into several copy-torts emphasizes that ‘rights’ are not absolute, the harms are mostly relational. Conduct or Outcome- Responsibility CR: Copying for certain uses triggers liability OR: Copying must cause diversion. CR: Publishing triggers liability. OR: Copying must cause reputational injury CR: Decision making triggers liability.

4 Insight #2 Consumer copying and competitor copying cases do seem to be treated differently. Consumer copying – Like trespass – Real question is substitution – Implies a narrower scope of derivatives Competitor copying – Like unfair competition – Real question is destructive free riding – Expressive substitution is a key concern – But implies a broader scope of licensable derivatives?

5 Potential applications Consumer/competitor – DVR by consumer is fair use, but R-DVR is not? – Consumer slingbox is not copyright infringement (not a public performance) but Aereo’s internet retransmission is copyright infringement?

6 Legal wrongs may not be distinct The right to make a derivative work based on the copyrighted work makes these legal wrong bleed into one another.

7 Will the Supreme Court have any love for taxonomies? Compare to ‘looks like a cable system’ in Aereo


Download ppt "Comments on UNBUNDLING THE “TORT” OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT by Patrick R. Goold Prof. Matthew Sag Loyola University School of Law."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google