Search for: "Terry Hart"
Results 61 - 80
of 102
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Sep 2011, 6:21 am
This month’s edition is on the PROTECT IP Act and includes opinion by Mike McCurry and Mark McKinnon, Robert Levine, Luke Ebbin, Terry Hart and Chris Castle. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 7:11 am
Kind of Bamboozled: Why ‘Kind of Bloop’ is Not a Fair Use [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:27 pm
L.J. 187-219 (2010).FISHERIES.Diaz, Leticia M. and Barry Hart Dubner, Foreign fishing piracy vs. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 9:44 am
There is plenty of room out there for thoughtful commentary; I’d particularly recommend readers bookmark Terry Hart’s “Copyhype,” which since last summer has been providing rigorously researched debunking of some of the copyleft’s latest tropes. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 1:58 am
Terry Hart has posted two articles on copyright law in his Copyhype blog: In The Reverse Class Action Lawsuit: Challenges of Enforcing Copyright Online, he looks at the strategy behind a lawsuit that's been filed by an adult film producer against a class of alleged infringers. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 1:00 am
Terry Hart responded to criticisms of such seizures, quite persuasively I thought, in a [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 6:49 pm
Patton, Montgomery, Rommel, Terry Brighton 29. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 10:35 am
Entertainment Law Reporter Blog points to an interesting post from Terry Hart's Copyhype Blog discussing the feds' seizure of domain names owned by folks alleged to be engaged in counterfeiting and copyright infringement. [read post]
30 Dec 2010, 1:00 am
Terry Hart rebuts criticisms of the government's recent seizures of domain names that were being used to distribute counterfeit and infringing copies of copyrighted goods. [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 11:42 am
Terry Hart continues his earlier discussion of copyright and free speech in a post titled "Speech Interests of Creators" in his Copyhype blog. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 10:52 am
Copyhype, November 1, 2010 by Terry Hart http://bit.ly/boCmK5 The Copyright Principles Project came about in part from Samuelson’s idea of creating a “model copyright law” … which could provide “an inchoate vision of a ‘good’ copyright law”; ”provide a platform from which to launch specific copyright reforms”: and prove useful as a resource to courts and commentators [...] [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 5:04 pm
Update: As one commenter pointed out, Terry Hart's blog Copyhype has a detailed point-by-point comparison of many ACTA provisions to the relevant U.S. law. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 9:34 am
Terry Hart looks at the subset of recommendations in the Copyright Principles Project report (mentioned earlier here) that "call for an increased role for the US Copyright Office within copyright law. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 8:59 am
Former FBI agent Terry Hart was appointed as a special prosecutor pro tem. [read post]
6 Oct 2010, 2:37 am
Terry Hart, 58, Decatur, Illinois, was convicted for his participation in a real estate "flipping" scheme. [read post]
19 Sep 2010, 5:41 pm
But—while we criminal defense lawyers focus our energy on the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments—Terry Hart reminds us that there is more to the Constitution than the Bill of Rights when he tells us how the Copyright Clause, Article I, Section 8, became part of the Constitution (Copyhype). [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 3:06 am
Terry Hart embarks on a fairly detailed comparison of (what was known about the draft) ACTA and US copyright law to see how much would need to change “ACTA: Thought for FUD” in 4 parts Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 One might well be very sceptical about something being negotiated “in private”. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 9:57 am
New copyright blogger and friend Terry Hart recently renewed the debate about the use of the word “theft” in the copyright debate. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 8:30 pm
Just a quick plug for the new copyright blog "Copyhype," by recent law school graduate Terry Hart. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 3:52 am
But as the law stands (ie the law as applied in Terry), if upon an application for interim injunctive relief the analysis at stage 1 is that the information in question is private but also happens to be defamatory, the court is apparently barred ab initio from giving any effect at all to the applicant’s Article 8 rights. [read post]
