3 Week 3: Setting the Stage – The Regulator’s Toolbox (02/05 & 02/06) 3 Week 3: Setting the Stage – The Regulator’s Toolbox (02/05 & 02/06)
3.1 Day 5 3.1 Day 5
3.1.1. “The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach” by Lawrence Lessig, 1999 (Read 501-505; 546)
The reading provides an introduction to cyberlaw’s relationship to traditional law, demonstrating the forces of code, norms, markets, and law. Legal perceptions and rules would need to evolve as the cyberspace environment develops and expands over time.
3.1.2. Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios, 1984 [shortened version to come]
This is a seminal case when it comes to the response of copyright to new technologies. Which legal theories does the court endorse or reject? Is this reasoning aligned with the outcome? Are there non-legal theories the court may be implicitly considering, and if so, what are they?
3.2 Day 6 [Choose 2 of 3] 3.2 Day 6 [Choose 2 of 3]
3.2.1. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. V. Grokster, Ltd., 2005 [shortened version to come]
We revisit what happens when new technology erodes long-held notions of property. Compare the legal theories here to those entertained in Sony – where do they overlap? Why do you think the outcomes are drastically different? Are these all legal reasons?
3.2.2. “Provable Copyright Protection for Generative Models – Windows On Theory” by Boaz Barak, 2023
This article explores a technical approach to mitigating potential copyright concerns. Are they the correct ones? Can you think of other technical solutions? Are there any inherent limitations to the role we can expect technical solutions to play?
3.2.3. NYTimes v. OpenAI, 2023 [shortened version to come]
This is the complaint that NYTimes filed against open AI. What are the most compelling legal theories? Is this more like Sony? Or more like Grockster?