Technology & Marketing Law Blog

AUGUST 16, 2024

I added a summary of contributory and vicarious copyright law principles from the Frontier Communications case. Copyright Copyright Basics (Copyright Office Circular 1) Note About Fair Use Cartoon Network v. Privacy Review: 16 C.F.R. Spam Review: CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 [[link] and 16 C.F.R.

Editing 101

Editing Law Social Media Contracts 101

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

AUGUST 2, 2021

Some of the major changes to the book this year: I added a note on the Copyright Claims Board. I’ve now framed it as a note about California’s consumer privacy laws. US case, which overwrote most of my prior note on Nosal and Power Ventures. Primer on the Copyright Claims Board (CCB). Note About Fair Use.

Editing 145

Editing Law Privacy Contracts 145

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

JULY 12, 2022

Primer on the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) (now deleted). Copyright Basics (Copyright Office Circular 1). Note About Fair Use. Part 312, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act’s Regulations. s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and State Consumer Privacy Laws. Primer on FOSTA.

Editing 141

Editing Law Social Media Privacy 141

43(B)log

DECEMBER 20, 2022

Nathan directed the allegedly infringing 2013 Documentary, which “tells the story of Pug, a thirteen-year-old child who wants to be a ‘12 O’Clock Boy,’ just like [he] has repeatedly watched in [the 2001 and 2003 Documentaries].” Defendants' 2013 documentary Both parties’ works are “docu-fiction” set in Baltimore.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Trademark Copyright Editing 52

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

AUGUST 7, 2023

Primer on CCPA/CPRA (partially deprecated) Primer on FOSTA Primer on the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) (now deleted) Primer on Section 230 Excerpt on right to be forgotten Excerpt on CFAA/Nosal/Power Ventures (now deleted) Excerpt on transborder content enforcement Excerpt on Brazil’s Marco Civil (now deleted) Excerpt on notes about UMG v. .

Editing 52

Editing Law Contracts Privacy 52

43(B)log

AUGUST 8, 2024

Prince finds fairness in many images when Prince didn’t care about other artists; Graham v. Prince rejects fair use when his stated intent was to have fun. Sexual pleasure: when mark is used to “titillate” or convey a message that sex is good, that doesn’t establish parody or commentary. Disdain as paradigmatic fair use.

IP 59

IP Fair Use Privacy Licensing 59

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

JANUARY 27, 2022

It creates a third asset for creators to sell, in addition to any physical item and the work’s copyright. The extra cash flows from NFTs could spur new creative activity–a win for all of us. The first Supreme Court ruling on fair use in over a quarter-century, and it’s a good one.

Social Media 129

Social Media Law Privacy Government 129