Sarah Hinchliff Pearson is Senior Counsel at Creative Commons. She became a fellow at the Center for Internet and Society (CIS) in January 2009. Her research and writing focuses on the First Amendment implications of copyright and defamation law, and the impact of technology on the media and democracy, with a particular interest in the evolution of journalism in the digital age. Prior to joining CIS, she worked as an intellectual property associate at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP in New York City. Sarah graduated cum laude from the University of Michigan Law School in 2006. Before law school, Sarah received her undergraduate degree from the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University and worked at a number of media outlets, including New York magazine and HARPO Studios.
Uncertain Implications of Ninth Circuit Ruling on Copyright Licensing
By Sarah Hinchliff Pearson • January 11, 2011 at 4:44 pm
If you have ever actually read through a software end user license agreement, you know that they are often full of restrictions on how you can use the software. Typically, the agreement states that the license to use the software is contingent upon compliance with all of those restrictions. If you violate any of those provisions, you are breaching the agreement. But are you also committing copyright infringement? According to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, it depends.
In its recent opinion in MDY Industries v. Blizzard Entertainment, the Ninth Circuit held that violation of a provision in a license agreement is only copyright infringement if the provision violated has a "nexus" to one of the exclusive rights granted under copyright law -- reproduction, public performance or display, distribution, and creation of derivative works. That means, for example, that failure to obey a license provision prohibiting cheating in a copyrighted video game is not copyright infringement. But violation of a prohibition on creating derivative works of the game would be. This holding has important implications. As EFF has pointed out, the court's decision will help prevent copyright owners from using copyright law to enforce onerous requirements on licensees. (Copyright law provides much stronger legal remedies than contract law.) But on the other hand, it is not clear what the decision means for public licensing schemes.
{C} Read more » about Uncertain Implications of Ninth Circuit Ruling on Copyright Licensing
Back to the CIS Blog
By Sarah Hinchliff Pearson • January 10, 2011 at 2:21 pm
After a long hiatus, I now plan to return to regularly blogging on this site. To see what I have been up to the past nine months, visit the Peter Jennings Project for Journalists and the Constitution site where I was a featured guest blogger. There, I wrote about constitutional issues in technology to educate journalists about the law. Read more » about Back to the CIS Blog
Objective Failure: Why the debate about media objectivity threatens the viability of general-interest news outlets.
By Sarah Hinchliff Pearson • May 3, 2010 at 3:44 pm
In the midst of a crisis threatening the very existence of the journalism industry, it might seem like an odd time to debate the merits of objective news reporting. But the doctrine of objectivity, a canon of professional journalism since the early 20th century, is at the center of the debate about the future of journalism. Some commentators claim objectivity is the source of the mainstream media’s failure to connect with the public, while others argue it is the noble ideal that will save the professional press.
Whether they deem objectivity a problem or panacea, both schools of thought subscribe to the mistaken notion that journalists must choose one of two options – embrace opinion journalism or renew the commitment to cultivating the image of objectivity. Under either scenario, general interest news sources are unlikely to survive. Read more » about Objective Failure: Why the debate about media objectivity threatens the viability of general-interest news outlets.
Conference about the Future of News
By Sarah Hinchliff Pearson • April 20, 2010 at 2:40 pm
Next week, the Stanford Law School Center for Internet & Society (CIS) is hosting a conference titled The Future of Journalism: Unpacking the Rhetoric. The event is free and open to the public, and we have more than 150 people signed up to attend.
The conference opens with a talk by Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now, at 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 29th. Goodman will be signing copies of her books following the event.
On Friday, April 30th, there will be four panel debates. Each panel is designed to challenge a particular tenet of conventional wisdom about the future of news. Registration is required for this portion of the conference.
The entire event will be broadcast in a live webcast on the conference web site. Please visit http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/futureofnews/ for more information.
We hope you will join us! Read more » about Conference about the Future of News
Isn't It Ironic? The Fourth Estate's Assault on Free Speech
By Sarah Hinchliff Pearson • December 10, 2009 at 12:27 pm
It’s nothing new for media organizations to employ lofty rhetoric about the role of the press in democracy to advocate special legal privileges. Likewise, it’s nothing new for content creators to try to limit the speech rights of others in order to garner more profit. What is fairly new, however, is for the press to use language about the importance of the First Amendment to argue for a copyright policy that would explicitly limit free speech. In other words, in order to save the First Amendment, we have to limit the First Amendment. Irony is dead.
This week, Rupert Murdoch wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that exemplified this clever strategy. Aptly titled “Journalism and Freedom,” the article belittles the fair use doctrine and demands compensation for news content online, while going on to wax eloquent about the ideals of the Founding Fathers and the First Amendment. The problem is that the right he claims to value above all else, the freedom of speech, is precisely what prevents media companies like News Corp. from claiming ownership in the news. Facts cannot be owned, so while News Corp. can certainly prevent third parties from reproducing stories in full, it has no right to control the facts within those stories. This is not a peculiarity of copyright law; it is a protection of the First Amendment and an effort to create the informed citizenry Murdoch claims to cherish. Read more » about Isn't It Ironic? The Fourth Estate's Assault on Free Speech
Pages
Golan v. Holder
The FUP filed this suit on behalf of a University of Denver conductor and others, challenging Congress’s restoration of copyright to works that had entered the public domain. Read more » about Golan v. Holder
Murphy v. Millennium Radio Group, LLC, Craig Carton and Ray Rossi
We filed an amicus brief in the Third Circuit on behalf of Brave New Films urging affirmance of the district court’s finding of fair use and rejection of plaintiff’s DMCA claims. Read more » about Murphy v. Millennium Radio Group, LLC, Craig Carton and Ray Rossi
Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens and NFL, et al.
We filed an amicus brief in the Fourth Circuit in support of the Baltimore Ravens and the NFL urging the Fourth Circuit to grant rehearing or rehearing en banc, after a divided panel ruled that the Raven’s incidental use of a copyrighted logo in historical game films was not a fair use. Read more » about Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens and NFL, et al.
Salinger v. Colting, et al.
We filed an amicus brief on behalf of a group of library associations and others asking the Second Circuit to reverse a lower court’s injunction of the publication of 60 Years Later: Coming through the Rye an unauthorized story based on J.D. Salinger’s in Catcher In The Rye. Read more » about Salinger v. Colting, et al.
Gaylord v. U.S. Postal Service
We filed an amicus brief in the Federal Circuit on behalf of the Warhol Foundation and Warhol Museum, contemporary artists and law professors in support of the U.S. Postal Service, urging affirmance of the district court’s finding of fair use. Read more » about Gaylord v. U.S. Postal Service
Golan v. Holder - Petition for a Writ of Certiorari
Murphy v. Millennium Radio Group - Amicus Brief
Amicus brief filed in the Third Circuit on behalf of Brave New Films urging affirmance of the district court’s finding of fair use and rejection of plaintiff’s DMCA claims. Read more » about Murphy v. Millennium Radio Group - Amicus Brief
Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens and NFL, et al. - Amicus Brief
We filed an amicus brief in the Fourth Circuit in support of the Baltimore Ravens and the NFL urging the Fourth Circuit to grant rehearing or rehearing en banc, after a divided panel ruled that the Raven’s incidental use of a copyrighted logo in historical game films was not a fair use. Read more » about Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens and NFL, et al. - Amicus Brief
Salinger v. Colting, et al. - Amicus Brief of American Library Association, et al.
We filed an amicus brief on behalf of a group of library associations and others asking the Second Circuit to reverse a lower court’s injunction of the publication of Read more » about Salinger v. Colting, et al. - Amicus Brief of American Library Association, et al.
Gaylord v. U.S. Postal Service - Amicus Brief
Amicus brief filed in the Federal Circuit on behalf of the Andy Warhol Foundation, and several other amici, including the Warhol Museum, contemporary artists Barbara Kruger, Thomas Lawson, Jonathan Monk, and Allen Ruppersberg, and a variety of law professors. Read more » about Gaylord v. U.S. Postal Service - Amicus Brief
Widespread Taxing Of Bloggers Could Stifle Internet Speech, Internet Speech Advocates Say
Sarah Hinchcliff Pearson, residential fellow at the Center for Internet and Society, is quoted on potentially requiring bloggers to buy a business license if their blog recieves advertising revenue. Kamala Lane of Washington Internet Daily reports: Read more » about Widespread Taxing Of Bloggers Could Stifle Internet Speech, Internet Speech Advocates Say