That title riffs on the term of art in trademark law known as “likelihood of confusion.” It refers to a foundational test, which asks whether the average consumer will confuse a particular mark (words, design, or both) with a product or service that is not produced or distributed by the company associated with a known mark. Thus, beware the Rollex, ...
“Where AI merely assists an author in the creative process, its use does not change the copyrightability of the output. At the other extreme, if content is entirely generated by AI, it cannot be protected by copyright.” – Copyright and Artificial Intelligence Part 2, Copyrightability, USCO – Last week, the U.S. Copyright Office released Part 2 of a planned three-part ...
Many copyright scholars refer to England’s Statute of Anne (1710) as the “first authors’ copyright law,” but I quarrel with that summary. In that year, and for many decades to follow, English “rights” for authors were too intertwined with the Crown’s authority to sanction publication of works for us to think of the Statute of Anne as affirming copyright rights ...
A common disparagement of copyright advocacy is that it is anti-technology. Despite overwhelming evidence that professional creators are early adopters of new technlogical developements, the talking point persists that enforcing the rights of creators can only “stifle innovation.” This “Luddite” critique of copyright rights was used to defend the predatory models of social and streaming platforms (and defend outright piracy), ...
In this podcast, I talk with Tim Friedlander, voice actor, musician, and founder of the National Associaion of Voice Actors (NAVA). Tim joined me to talk about AI — its potential threats to his profession, his experience meeting on Capitol Hill, and his views on why this subject matters. Contents ...
