CREATe’s Post

My Comment, “Lassoing Transformativeness: Taking Court-Approved Chaos and Grounding it in Congressional Order,” was published today in Volume 48, Issue 2, of the Journal of Legislation and Public Policy at Seton Hall Law. Since publishing my first novel, "Death, the Gardener," I have found learning about the evolving nature of copyright protections in our country to be, not only fascinating, but also exceptionally practical. I hope our laws continue to evolve to aid artists in their quest to express themselves and inspire others. I want to thank my academic advisors and all the journal editors involved; without them, this would not have been possible! My Comment is available here: https://lnkd.in/ezUw-6Yi

ICYMI: In this new article in Constitutional Forum, I consider the past, present and future of the paramountcy doctrine in the law of Canadian federalism. https://lnkd.in/gJsYhaY3

Having the opportunity to work on this project was an absolute pleasure Peter Mezei Marianna Foerg. I am totally looking forward to working on such insightful manuscripts in the near future. #NFTs #copyrights #blockchaintechnology #cryptocurrency #technologylaw #intellectualproperty

Professor Graham Dutfield urges us to acknowledge and respect worldviews in which culture and nature are seen as inseparable, all life is interconnected, and landscapes are viewed as living entities that are both cultural and spiritual. He emphasises that these perspectives cannot merely be reduced to property rights. As we continue to shape our laws and policies, it is crucial to recognise that they often stem from worldviews that may not only be alien but also potentially harmful to these communities. Respecting these diverse perspectives is not about adopting them but understanding their value and ensuring our global policies do not inadvertently perpetuate cultural insensitivity or environmental degradation. Let's open our minds to the richness of understanding that integrates rather than separates, respects rather than undermines. The future can be brighter if we learn from each other and consider all voices, especially those who have been marginalised. #CulturalSensitivity #EnvironmentalConservation #IndigenousRights #LegalReform #SustainableFuture

In this article, the concept of optional registration is explained, which is regulated in the Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works and is one of the registration processes carried out to provide ease of proof in determining the rights ownership upon the request of the author. We wish you pleasant reading.

I'm pleased to announce that my forthcoming article, The Grapes of Roth, will be published in volume 99 of the Washington Law Review later this year. A draft is available here: https://lnkd.in/eAu2EiJf I argue that judicial decisions on substantial similarity in copyright cases went through three stages in the 20th century: one based on equity, one based on the sort of rule-formalism associated with the Legal Process School, and a modern stage of procedural formalism in which disputed issues of fact, including substantial similarity, are portioned off to a jury. The infamous "total concept and feel" test for substantial similarity from the Roth Greetings Card case arose as a way of managing the transition from stage one to stage two, but then perversely became an impenetrable jury instruction in stage three. The recent rise of increased review at the motion to dismiss stage is allowing some judicial recapture of control over substantial similarity decisions, mostly in the Second Circuit.

"It makes me a little bit nervous" — one could appreciate the honesty of the counsel during the Supreme Court hearing on Texas and Florida laws restricting social media platforms' content moderation rights. The judge's question, "How should the court proceed?" also reveals tension and even less clarity surrounding this pivotal case. 📅 Nevertheless, in about a month, the Supreme Court is expected to deliver a landmark ruling that will significantly impact the ongoing debate about free speech online. 🤔 At the heart of this case is a crucial question: whose free speech rights should prevail? Is it the platforms' right to moderate content (free speech in the editorial sense) 📋, or the states' effort to protect users' right to free speech? 🗣️ This decision will inevitably require the Supreme Court to reflect on the application of the 18th century First Amendment 📜 to the modern issues of the 21st century 🌐.

Online platform regulation from a cooyright perspective: here you find a broad spectrum of views and arguments from both sides of the Atlantic!

The latest issue of Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property (QMJIP) from Edward Elgar Publishing Volume 14 Issue 1 - is now available, with free access to "The mismatch between geographical indication protection against evocation and its underlying objectives,' by Xinzhe Song and Ying Zhou - https://lnkd.in/edQneGZP This issue also includes an investigation of the approach of the German courts to competition defences in standard essential patent litigation, from Giuseppe Colangelo and Andrea A. https://lnkd.in/e6SnptSj as well as Peicheng Wu's consideration of possible antitrust implications raised by a refusal to license https://lnkd.in/em9_a7eP and Liguo Zhang's examination of standard-essential patent disputes through the lens of sustainability of technological resources https://lnkd.in/e34wvE2U And from the editor, Prof Johanna Gibson - a consideration of the wider significance of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in "People or patents, inventors or owners: why the Supreme Court decision on artificial intelligence and invention in Thaler is significant for all intellectual property" https://lnkd.in/epSqfKmF We hope you enjoy the issue! https://lnkd.in/d8VrVCKM

🎄🎅🏻 Looking for some readings under your Christmas tree? Look no further! 🌍 Happy and a little bit proud to announce the latest issue of the European Review of Private Law (ERPL) (2023, vol. 31.5), for which, as guest editor, I put together no less than 10 country reports on the fascinating topic of Apologies as a Legal Remedy. ⚖️ While apologizing can be difficult for the person who committed the wrong, it can be important for the person who has been wronged to receive apologies. But does the law provide the victim with a claim for apologies? On this question, the Belgian Cour de cassation delivered a landmark decision on 26 November 2021, accepting that such a claim could be available under Belgian tort law. 📖 Following this decision, a wonderful team of authors shed light on the availability of court-ordered apologies from their national perspectives in the following 10 reports: 🇨🇳 1. China: Lei CHEN (Durham Law School) 🇨🇿 2. Czech Republic: Jiri Hradek (Charles University Prague) 🇬🇧 3. England: Simon Taylor (Paris Nanterre) 🇫🇷 4. France: Patrice Jourdain (Paris 1 - Panthéon-Sorbonne) 🇩🇪 5. Germany: Stephan Lorenz & Aline Brießmann (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München) 🇭🇺 6. Hungary: András Koltay (Pazmany Peter Catholic University) 🇮🇹 7. Italy: Nicola Brutti (University Padua) 🇳🇱 8. the Netherlands: Lianne Wijntjens (OU) 🇵🇱 9. Poland: Jerzy Pisuliński & Kacper Górniak (Jagiellonian University Cracow) 🇪🇸 10. Spain: Albert Ruda (University Girona) My introduction provides a general overview and draws some tentative conclusions. It touches upon one of the fundamental questions of private law, which particularly concerns the objectives to be pursued by this field of law: is it about the money and thus about purely pecuniary interests, or is there more within the private law arena? The issue is available here: https://lnkd.in/e9zqKjgU 👏🏻 A big shout out to the authors for their comparative insights, and to ERPL for making this happen! Matthias Storme André Janssen Happy holidays!🎄💫