When: Saturday, April 2, 2011 (10 a.m. – 2 p.m.)

Where: Moot Court room at Maine Law

Speakers

• Catherine Bigley McGovern: Dr. McGovern teaches Entertainment Law and Theatre Law at DePaul University College of Law. Her consulting practice is focuses on Art Law, Entertainment Law and Cultural Property. She has an active practice in mediation and arbitration in the Arts and Cultural Property areas. Dr. McGovern has been trained by The California Lawyers for The Arts and the Academy of Dispute Resolution Attorneys and has a particular sensitivity to the concerns and interests of artists in all disciplines.
• Peter McGovern: Director of the Center for International Business and Trade Law and administrative coordinator for the seven Centers for Excellence at the John Marshall Law School. Professor McGovern has served as Professor and Dean at the John Marshall Law School, Acting Dean at the University of South Dakota School of Law and Dean at Valparaiso University School of Law and St Thomas University School of Law. He teaches Elder Law, Estates and Trusts, International Commercial Dispute Resolution, and Transactional Negotiations.
• Rita Heimes: Director of the Center for Law & Innovation and a Research Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Intellectual Property Clinic, Copyright Law and Trademark Law at the University of Maine School of Law. In addition to serving entrepreneurs seeking trademark and copyright advice with the IP Clinic, Rita serves as co-chair of the Research Council at USM, and as a governor-appointed member of the Maine Innovation Economy Advisory Board which acts as an advisory committee to the state’s Office of Innovation. Rita has practiced IP law, environmental law and commercial litigation.

Cost: Free. Food will be provided.

New England Sports, Entertainment, & IP Law Symposium from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules

Mr. Smith is only one of the many amazing names that will be in Chicago at the conference. Some of the other great names include Jeff Gewirtz, Senior VP and General Counsel of NETS Basketball/ Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment. Stephanie Varvadas, Managing Attorney for Nike Inc. Donald M. Fehr, Executive Director and General Counsel for the MLBPA, Richard J. Berthelsen, General Counsel for the NFLPA,  along with Professors Richard Karcher Director of Law and Professor Florida Coastal School of Law Center for Law and Sports, Vared Yakovee Professor at USC Gould School of Law and Editor-in-chief of Entertainement & Sports Lawyer, Gary R. Roberts from Indiana University School of Law and Gabe Feldman, Director of the Tulane Univesity Sports Law Program to name only a few.

35th Annual SLA Conference In Chicago Coming Soon from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules

Anyway, since starting law school, my appreciation for technology and intellectual property has increased.  I am currently taking a course in Copyright Law that I love, and plan to take courses like Media Law, Cyber Law, and Intellectual Property Litigation before I graduate.  If you think that Sports Law is devoid of IP issues, think again.

The Online Sports Guys picked up an article by the AP about Greg Gumbel suing Encore Television Group for using Gumbel’s taped introductions to endorse products that he never agreed to endorse.  Gumbel had no idea that the intros would be used for infomercials.  He claims that he was originally approached to film the intros for educational and news-oriented programming.  This has more to do with the contract that was signed between the parties and the understandings surrounding the agreement, but it still deals with IP in a sense.  It is more about Gumbel’s moral rights than his copyright to the material.

But then there is the story about the AP looking for revenue share from sites that use content from news organization without permission.  This is certainly a Copyright Law issue and affects the sports world as well (ahem, sports bloggers).  AP executives are concerned about sites that link to news articles, smaller sites that sometimes reproduce articles whole, and companies that sell packaged news feeds.

News aggregators and search companies have long asserted that collecting snippets of articles — usually headlines and a sentence or two — is allowed under the legal doctrine of “fair use.” News organizations have been reluctant to test that idea in court, and it is still not clear whether The A.P. is willing to test the fair use doctrine.

Let’s break it down into the three categories of sites that the A.P. is concerned about:

1. Sites that link to news articles (i.e. Google, Yahoo) – A good case to look at is Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc. (U.S. Ct. App 9th Cir. 2007).  The court stated that providing HTML instructions isn’t the same as showing a copy. Google = HTML instructions.  If a site like Google is to be held contributory liable for infringement, a court must find direct infringement by 3^rd party first. There is contributory infringement if a site like Google intentionally induces or encourages direct infringement through specific acts or on distributing a product that infringe copyrights, if the product isn’t capable of “substantial” or “commercially significant” non-infringing uses.  To be contributorily liable, a site like Google would need to have actual knowledge of infringing activity. If Google has knowledge of infringing material on its system and fails to purge material from the system when it can take simple measures to prevent further damage, Google contributes to direct infringement.  So even if Google is linking to sites that may be violating the A.P.’s copyrights, the A.P. would need to show that Google could take simple measures to fix the issue (good luck!).
2. Smaller sites that sometimes reproduce articles whole – If the smaller site gains anything from the complete copying of the articles, then it is infringement.  The only way a smaller site can justify a fair use is if absolutely no money is made on the site, the information is necessary for the general public to consume, and the original work is still extremely valuable.  Won’t hold up.  But will the A.P. put its time, money, and energy into filing claims against these smaller sites?
3. Companies that sell packaged news feeds – This is definitely the most interesting category and the hardest to pin down.  News feeds are fairly new to the online market, and has rarely if ever been a part of any litigation.  As with the sites that link to news articles, news feeds are HTML instructions, not actual copy.  Thus, there is no direct infringement.  We must look to whether there is a possibility of contributory infringement.  Again, I think it will be a hard sell for the A.P.  Companies that sell packaged news feeds have little control over whether one of the feeds directly infringes upon another’s copyright.  If the A.P. can prove that a company has actual knowledge that one of its packaged news feeds is engaging in direct infringement, then maybe the A.P. has a case.  But it is a tough burden for the A.P. to prove.

Fair use is a privilege in others than the owner of the copyright to use the copyrighted material in a reasonable manner w/out his consent.  #1 and #3 look like fair uses.  #2 looks like egregious direct infringement, but infringement that may not be worth going to court over.

Sports Law Meets IP Law from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules