The Record

Twitters Beware: The Display and Performance Rights

In a controversial decision in Goldman v. Breitbart, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that, by embedding a tweet containing a copyrighted photograph in a webpage, defendants violated the copyright owner’s exclusive display right. In reaching this decision, the Goldman court explicitly rejected the “server test,” which was first established over a decade ago by the Ninth Circuit in Perfect 10 v. Google, and has since then become a de facto bright-line rule upon which many Internet actors rely.

From Human Rights Aspirations to Enforceable Obligations by Non-State Actors in the Digital Age: The Case of Internet Governance and ICANN

As the global policymaking capacity and influence of non-state actors in the digital age is rapidly increasing, the protection of fundamental human rights by private actors becomes one of the most pressing issues in global governance.

Analogies in IP: Moral Rights

This Article critically examines the analogies scholars use to explain the special relation between the author and her work that copyright law protects under the doctrine of moral rights. Authors, for example, are described as parents and their works as children. The goal of this Article is to determine “when to drop the analogy and get on with developing” the content of the relation between the author and the work. Upon examination, that moment approaches rather quickly: none of these analogies provide any helpful framework for understanding the purported relation.

Objects, Places and Cyber-Spaces Post-Carpenter: Extending The Third-Party Doctrine Beyond CSLI: A Consideration of IoT and DNA

At the November 2017 oral arguments in the case Carpenter v.

Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice in the Age of Internet Interconnectivity: How Masking an IP Address Could Constitute Purposeful Availment

Personal jurisdiction has been a time-honored judicial concept since the 1800s. The Supreme Court has considered the ramifications of personal jurisdiction and its application in various factual scenarios over the years, often leading to plurality opinions where the Justices disagreed on the reasoning behind the judgements. The confusion resulting from this lack of consensus over the doctrine’s application has been further compounded by advances in technology.