Buggy Whips and Broadcast Flags: The Need for a New Politics of Expression

By: Garrett Levin In response to growing fears from the entertainment industry over online file-sharing of valuable content, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) enacted sweeping regulations over the production of electronic devices in the name of protecting digital television broadcasts. Although the FCC’s “broadcast flag” regulation was struck down on jurisdictional grounds, Hollywood has not given up the push for strict control. If Hollywood successfully acquires broadcast flag protection there could be far-reaching implications for innovation and development of new digital technologies. While content providers have important reasons to protect copyrighted material, there is too much at stake to merely acquiesce to their demands in the name of piracy prevention. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0024

When the Public Does Not Have a Right to Know: How the California Public Records Act Is Deterring Bioscience Research and Development

By: Nader Mousavi & Matthew J. Kleiman Many bioscience firms collaborate with public research universities to conduct innovative research through sponsored research agreements. Companies sponsoring this research usually require strict confidentiality from their academic partners in order to protect sensitive information that, if revealed, could put them at a competitive disadvantage and threaten their ability to obtain future patents. Yet, ambiguous disclosure requirements in the California Public Records Act preclude California’s public research universities from guaranteeing that proprietary information provided in connection with sponsored research agreements will remain confidential. Entering into such agreements with public universities in California is therefore a risky proposition for the sponsors. This iBrief argues that unless this is corrected, many of these public/private partnerships, which often lead to significant advances in science and medicine, may be deterred. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0023

Unfinished Business: Are Today’s P2P Networks Liable for Copyright Infringement?

By: Christine Pope In June 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the decision in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios v. Grokster Ltd., a case that asked whether peer-to-peer networks may be held liable for facilitating the illegal distribution of music over the internet. The music industry petitioned the Supreme Court to settle the disagreement between the circuit courts over the standard of liability for aiding in copyright infringement. The case was based on a clash between the protection of technological innovation and the protection of artistic works. This iBrief examines the circuit split and the Grokster opinion and discusses the questions of liability left unresolved by the Supreme Court. It argues that further clarification of the Sony rule is still needed in order to encourage the proliferation of legitimate peer-to-peer networks by protecting their services while discouraging illegitimate file-sharing activities. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0022