Law 874: Seminar in Advanced Copyright Law Topics
Assignment for September 29: Useful articles and Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, part 1
Although the Supreme Court has decided several patentable subject matter cases in the past decade, it has not addressed the boundaries of copyrightable subject matter since its 1954 decision in Mazer v. Stein, 347 U.S. 201 (1954). This term, the Court will be looking at how courts should assess whether a feature of a useful article is copyrightable in a case about cheerleader uniforms.
- Review section 113, the definitions of useful articles and pictorial, graphic and sculptural works in section 101, and the 7th Circuit opinion in Pivot Point Intl v. Charlene Products, 372 F.3d 913 (7th Cir. 2004) (at page 181 of the Cohen Casebook or here via Google Scholar).
- Read an excerpt from H. R. Rep. No. 1476, 94th Cong. (1976) (another copy)
- Read sections 906 and 924 (pp. 9-16 & 38-45) of the Compendium of US Copyright Office Practices: http://www.copyright.gov/comp3/chap900/ch900-visual-art.pdf.
- Skim three cases:
- Galiano v. Harrah’s Operating Co., Inc., 416 F. 3d 411 (5th Cir. 2005).
- Jovani Fashions, Ltd. v. Fiesta Fashions , 500 Fed. Appx. 42 (2d Cir 2012).
- Progressive Lighting v. Loew’s Home Centers, 549 Fed. Appx. 913 (11th Cir. 2013).
- Read Varsity Brands v. Star Athletica, 799 F.3d 468 (6th Cir. 2015) (another copy).
- Read Star Athletica's petition for certiorari.
- Optional: Read Kal Raustiala and Christopher Sprigman, The Piracy Paradox: Innovation and Intellectual Property in Fashion Design, 92 Va. L. Rev. 1687 (2006) (another copy) or C. Scott Hemphill & Jeanne Suk, The Law, Culture, and Economics of Fashion, 61 Stan. L. Rev. 1147 (2009) (another copy).
Upload a short (250-300 word) reaction paper to Canvas by 3:00 pm on Tuesday, September 27.