The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School is a leader in the study of the law and policy around the Internet and other emerging technologies.
Ryan is a cooperating attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. Since starting his law practice over 10 years ago, he has been collaborating with clients to create and implement effective strategies to litigate over, or negotiate, sophisticated technology and media transactions. Before starting his practice in 2016, Ryan was an antitrust and securities litigator at Milberg LLP in New York City and a legal consultant to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington D.C.
Ademir splits his time between two worlds. He is part-time is in academia, currently taking a PhD at University of Sao Paulo. His research focuses on efforts by Latin American regulators to promote increased access to broadband Internet and implement a network neutrality regime. He has been particularly interested in the debate involving the regulation of network neutrality in Brazil and the US, and has submitted contributions to the Brazilian Ministry of Justice and to the US Federal Communications Commission.
Chris Ridder is a Non-Residential Fellow at the Center for Internet and Society (CIS). His research interests include the full range of issues that arise at the intersection of technology and the law, including the application of intellectual property law to software and the Internet, and the impact of technological change on privacy and civil liberties. Prior to joining CIS, Chris was an associate at Simpson Thacher and Barltett LLP, where he litigated intellectual property and complex commercial cases.
The topic of this panel was cross-border issues in the online enforcement of intellectual property rights. The speakers brought a range of perspectives from the movie industry (Ben Sheffner), the public interest sector (Corynne McSherry), academia (Annemarie Bridy), and the tech industry (Alex Feerst).
The panel began with a discussion of Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Jack, a case then pending before the Supreme Court of Canada. In the case, Google challenged a lower court’s injunction requiring it to remove search results not only from its Canadian services, but globally. The sites belonged to the defendants, who were accused of trade secret misappropriation and trademark infringement. The defendants fled Canada during the course of the litigation, which led the court to strike their defenses as a sanction. The trial court ultimately issued an order enjoining the defendants from using Equustek’s trade secrets and from selling infringing inventory. The defendants predictably disregarded the court’s order. They continued to sell products from various websites they controlled from indeterminate locations. Equustek asked Google to globally remove search results for the defendants’ websites, which Google refused to do. Google agreed only to remove infringing URLs from results on its Canadian search service at www.google.ca. Equustek argued before the trial court that Google should be compelled to do more.
This post is cross-posted at Concurring Opinions, which is having a blog symposium on Marvin Ammori's excellent article on First Amendment Architecture. Next week, the Stanford Technology Law Review is holding its “First Amendment Challenges in the Digital Age” conference and one of the panels also will center on the piece. So it is getting a lot of attention!
This quote belongs to Robin Bienfait, RIM’s Chief Information Office (CIO). RIM makes the BlackBerries, and the title line of this post recites Ms. Bienfait’s answer to the question what information is being recorded on RIM’s internal network (e.g., telephone conversations and email exchange over employees’ devices).
For most of human history the essential nature of creativity was understood to be cumulative and collective. This notion has been largely forgotten by modern policies regulating creativity and speech. As hard as it may be to believe, the most valuable components of our immortal culture were created under a fully open regime as far as access to pre-existing expressions and reuse was concerned.
This is the third in a series of articles focusing on the experimental economics of intellectual property. In earlier work, we have experimentally studied the ways in which creators assign monetary value to the things that they create. That research has suggested that creators are subject to a systematic bias that leads them to overvalue their work.
"Elon Law Associate Professor David S. Levine traveled to Williamsburg, Virginia, in October for the 28th Annual Intellectual Property Seminar: The Evolving Landscape of IP, co-hosted by the Virginia CLE and the Intellectual Property Section of the Virginia State Bar.
"“While yoga certainly originated in India,” says Sonia Katyal, a law professor at Fordham University who specializes in intellectual property, “its widespread adoption in the West—including the hundreds of types of yogas created by enterprising westerners like mommy-and-me yoga, nude yoga, dog yoga—makes it a little harder to explain how its Indian origins are always essential the practice or characteristics of yoga today.”"
"Were Follett to take legal action, it would have a high bar to clear says Andrew Bridges, a partner at Fenwick and West who specializes in copyright law. “The object of intellectual property rights is emphatically not to restrict competition,” he says.
“What’s clear is that what this is really about is that one side is enabling comparisons in order to promote competition,” Bridges said. “And somebody really doesn’t like that competition.”"
"You need this for different programs to work together, said Julie Ahrens, director of Copyright and Fair Use at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society: “It’s almost like the alphabet or vocabulary.”"
In the midst of the controversy surrounding the release of a Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) negotiating text on intellectual property by Wikileaks yesterday, over 80 law professors of intellectual property law and related disciplines have written to President Obama, Members of Congress and the United States Trade Representative calling for the creation of a public process to vet the TPP’S intellectual property proposals.
For more information visit: http://isp.yale.edu/event/innovation-law-beyond-ip-2
Saturday March 28th featuring CIS Non-Residential Fellow Yana Welinder
Creative Production Without IP
Kevin Collins – Architectural Innovation Before the AWCPA
Lea Shaver – Publishing Without Property: Commons-Based Social Publishing and Its Implications for Educational and Book Policy
Three dimensional printing turns bits into atoms. The technology is simply amazing. These machines draw on programming, art and engineering to enable people to design and build intricate, beautiful, functional jewelry, machine parts, toys and even shoes. In the commercial sector, 3D printing can revolutionize supply chains as well. As the public interest group Public Knowledge wrote once, "It will be awesome if they don't screw it up."
Hosted by the Federalist Society. More info about this event.
Anthony Falzone and Mark Schultz will debate whether significant developments in U.S. copyright law work to protect or violate individual freedom. Professor Paul Goldstein will moderate. Mr. Flazone is the Executive Director of the Fair Use Project with SLS's Center for Internet and Society. Mr. Schultz is a professor of law at Southern Illinois University School of Law, and his research focuses on the intersection of copyright and social norms.
CIS Affiliate Scholar David Levine interviews Prof. Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School on the pending United States Supreme Court intellectual property cases.
This week, David Levine interviews Margot Kaminski of Yale Law School's Information Society Project.
In her talk, based on her forthcoming book from Yale Press, Contrabrand: Art, Advertising and Property in the Age of Corporate Identity, Sonia Katyal will discuss the intersection of art, commercial speech, and trademark law within the First Amendment, and will show how the law has shifted in response to the constitutional challenges the branding movement has created. In her talk, Katyal will focus on the "antibranding" movement in popular art and culture, which she defines to include the expressive activities of artists and activists who direct their energies towards challenging corporate branding. The greatest threat to cultural and artistic freedom, she argues, stems not from the pervasive power of the government, but instead from the powerful reach of corporate branding over artistic and consumer response.
A talk show on KZSU-FM, Stanford, 90.1 FM, hosted by CIS Affiliate Scholar David S. Levine. The show includes guests and focuses on the intersection of technology and society. How is our world impacted by the great technological changes taking place? Each week, a different sphere is explored. This week, David interviews Prof. Derek Bambauer of Brooklyn Law School, author of Orwell's Armchair. For more information, please go to http://hearsayculture.com.