1. Intellectual Property Law and New Media
MM 350
Intellectual Property Law and New Media
Ed Lamoureux, Ph. D.
Steve Baron, B.A., J.D.
Mandell Menkes, LLC
© Ed Lamoureux/Steve Baron

2. Here is our new product. How are we protecting this?
(can you find nine protections?)
Modified with apologies to our buddies down the hill

3. Copyright examples
Music publisher uses DMCA to take down Romney ad of Obama crooning
Offering P2P File-Sharing Software for Downloading May Be Copyright Inducement--David v. CBS Interactive
DVD circumvention for clips OK for certain teachers
And though you can now jail break some material to see it or use it, it’s not clear that average citizens can legally “back up” their drm-protected stuff.
Videogame App Developer Breaks the Rules on Copyright Infringement
Viacom International, Inc., v. YouTube, Inc

4. Patent examples Judge bars sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in US
Apple wins EU-wide ban on Galaxy Tab 7.7; Tab 10.1N not covered
Judge says RIM owes $147 million in patent infringement damages
Facebook, Yahoo will end litigation in "patent peace deal”
In bid for patent sanity, judge throws out entire Apple/Motorola case
Apple, Samsung both claim innovator status in opening of patent trial; goes to the jury

5. A trademark example
It’s real difficult for companies to protect their trademarks in the new media era. For example, as hard as Disney works this area (hard) there’s still:
DisneyHeaven.com
Among others. Here we have trademark & copyright infringement

6. Domain names, search terms, and meta-tags as trademark issues
Search Engine Legal Developments to Watch
Fourth Circuit's Rosetta Stone v. Google Opinion Pushes Back Resolution of Keyword Advertising Legality Another 5-10 Years
Court awards Verizon $33 million in cybersquatting squabble
As is often the case in digital IP disputes, the “criminals” in this
case are very difficult to identify and it’s unlikely that Verizon
will see any of that $ award.

7. We’ll also examine
Trade Secrets (but if we tell you about that today we’d have to kill you);
“Content Torts” including defamation, privacy (related to personality), and rights of publicity;
The complexities of International IP issues;
IP law in virtual environments.

8. The Principle Course Goals:
Investigate the relationships among and between:
Concretized ideas/creativity/innovation
Property (ownership)
Law
The Commons
The system is supposed to encourage creativity/ideas/innovation by using the legal protections of property to provide rewards that bring culturally enriching outcomes/products into citizens’ lives.

9. The Primary Assumptions:
Nothing has changed
Everything has changed

10. Nothing has Changed
There are, always have been, always will be, creative artists.
Artists often transfer their property rights and protections to others.
US intellectual property law has been in place for over two hundred years, is still in force, and is evolving daily.
America is tied to capital & property.

11. Everything has Changed
Digital technologies have driven the means of production and distribution within reach of “every-person.”
“The Law” has been (and continues to be) developed by the professional legal community, working for the professional production community. However, that same law must now “apply” to every-person, in mundane circumstances.
It’s difficult for “every-person” to understand/deal with (including difficulties in changing the laws).
Corporations employ lawyers; private citizens could do so, but probably can’t afford to.
The law was developed to mediate between corporations. Now it has to stretch to “me and thee,” and us to it.
Digital technologies are recombinant by their nature, thereby challenging in-place notions of “creativity.”

12. Some Important Issues for 350
What are the laws? What is the status quo under which the ground shifts?
What’s an artist/producer to do? What’s a gate keeper to do? What’s an average citizen to do?
What are the most interesting developments?
How does the law evolve and can it keep pace with with the evolution of technology?
Where are the current/future battlegrounds on the intellectual property front?
What’s best for society/the public?
Does the law promote or inhibit creative endeavors?
How does the law protect those who create?
Why should students of Interactive Media care about intellectual property law?
How does the law punish those who misappropriate?