article thumbnail

IPSC Breakout Session #2: mostly copyright and then marijuana innovation

43(B)log

Harper & Row gets litigated as a First Amendment/free press case by Floyd Abrams; Court relies on Nimmer. Court chose to rule quite narrowly in part b/c of concessions during litigation. The input was copyrightable; the output is not. Copyright for humans only? Second Circuit had buyer’s remorse about Prince v.

article thumbnail

WIPIP session 5: Anti-Circumvention

43(B)log

A: Chamberlain highlights that these are abuses, but you have conflicting precedent w/Blizzard and the Copyright Office saying no, 1201 is absolutely supposed to cover these situations. Highlights that Chamberlain and other cases are about personal property versus 1201’s use of copyright. Pam Samuelson: don’t forget 1202.

Privacy 59