As you learn about Intellectual Property, I'd like for you to watch Lawrence Lessig's TED Talk: "Law that choke creativity."
Even though this presentation was done in March 2007, it is still highly relevant to issues involving copyright and digital and online media.
Here's the talk:
After you watch the presentation, return here and add a comment about whether you agree with Lessig or not, and why or why not. Also, because this is the last week of Summer I 2015, the deadline for your comment is 11:59 p.m. Wednesday, July 1.
Remember, also, to include your first name, last name initial and Summer I 2015.
Monday, June 29, 2015
Monday, June 22, 2015
Abortion on deck for Supreme Court?
As we discussed in class today, there is a category of privacy cases that involve government intrusion. Historically, these cases began with Griswold v. Connecticut, a case involving a married couple's right to have access to contraceptives. This right of privacy, implied by the Bill of Rights, was extended to include the right to have an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy, and eventually, it protected gay and lesbian rights.
In recent years, state legislatures across the country have passed laws that appear to restrict access to abortion. Conservative politicians who have initiated these measures say that these new measures are designed to increase safety for women by increasing the standards in clinics that provide abortion. Reproductive justice advocates, however, argue that these laws -- like the one in Texas passed in 2013 -- make it harder, if not impossible, for women in Texas to get abortions.
Most recently, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld most of that 2013 Texas law, setting up a possible review by the U.S. Supreme Court. One question the court may address is whether the Texas law creates an "undue burden" on a woman's right to have an abortion.
Read this Associated Press article that summarizes the legal arguments and describes what's at stake: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_6439926.html
Also, read this analysis by Lyle Denniston, a legal writer who covers the U.S. Supreme Court: http://lyldenlawnews.com/2015/06/19/texas-abortion-case-reaches-the-court/
After you read these articles, return here and share your comments about how you think the U.S. Supreme Court may rule on this, should they decide to grant certiorari. Also, be sure to include why you think the court will rule the way you think. As an alternative, you can also address how you think the court should rule on this, and why.
As you know, abortion is a divisive political topic, so please be sensitive with your remarks. Also, please remember to include your first name, last name initial and Summer I.
In recent years, state legislatures across the country have passed laws that appear to restrict access to abortion. Conservative politicians who have initiated these measures say that these new measures are designed to increase safety for women by increasing the standards in clinics that provide abortion. Reproductive justice advocates, however, argue that these laws -- like the one in Texas passed in 2013 -- make it harder, if not impossible, for women in Texas to get abortions.
Most recently, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld most of that 2013 Texas law, setting up a possible review by the U.S. Supreme Court. One question the court may address is whether the Texas law creates an "undue burden" on a woman's right to have an abortion.
Read this Associated Press article that summarizes the legal arguments and describes what's at stake: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_6439926.html
Also, read this analysis by Lyle Denniston, a legal writer who covers the U.S. Supreme Court: http://lyldenlawnews.com/2015/06/19/texas-abortion-case-reaches-the-court/
After you read these articles, return here and share your comments about how you think the U.S. Supreme Court may rule on this, should they decide to grant certiorari. Also, be sure to include why you think the court will rule the way you think. As an alternative, you can also address how you think the court should rule on this, and why.
As you know, abortion is a divisive political topic, so please be sensitive with your remarks. Also, please remember to include your first name, last name initial and Summer I.
Monday, June 15, 2015
Libel: "mindnumbingly incoherent"
First, let me say how much I've enjoyed reading your comments on this blog. Your descriptions of favorite law-related movies, shows and even songs are quite interesting -- some of which I'm not familiar. Thanks for the recommendations. Also, your comments about the San Marcos Ten are interesting, too. Not many of you were aware of it, but like many of you, I'm glad we have greater freedom of speech on campus than in the past.
We now turn out attention to libel. There's a good article at the Columbia Journalism Review website about how complicated libel cases can be. In fact, one Supreme Court of South Carolina associate justice (Jean Toal, who is now chief justice) once wrote that the state's libel law was "mindnumbingly incoherent."
Yes, libel can be difficult, but that's why we'll spend most of the week discussing it.
Take a look at the CJR article to read about two current libel cases. You'll find a number of libel terms that connect with Chapters 4 and 5. Here's the link: http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/nytimes_city_paper_libel_suits.php
After you read the article, return here to comment on what you think will happen with either case (either the case involving the economics professor in Louisiana or the one involving the high school player in South Carolina). Who do you think will prevail, and why? Be sure to evaluate these cases with the libel chapters in mind.
Also, please remember to include your name and last name initial, and Summer I.
We now turn out attention to libel. There's a good article at the Columbia Journalism Review website about how complicated libel cases can be. In fact, one Supreme Court of South Carolina associate justice (Jean Toal, who is now chief justice) once wrote that the state's libel law was "mindnumbingly incoherent."
Yes, libel can be difficult, but that's why we'll spend most of the week discussing it.
Take a look at the CJR article to read about two current libel cases. You'll find a number of libel terms that connect with Chapters 4 and 5. Here's the link: http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/nytimes_city_paper_libel_suits.php
After you read the article, return here to comment on what you think will happen with either case (either the case involving the economics professor in Louisiana or the one involving the high school player in South Carolina). Who do you think will prevail, and why? Be sure to evaluate these cases with the libel chapters in mind.
Also, please remember to include your name and last name initial, and Summer I.
Monday, June 8, 2015
Free Speech at Texas State
So far this summer session, we've examined a few cases that involved the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 1970s: New York Times v. United States and United States v. O'Brien. In Chapter 3, we'll discuss Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District and Cohen v. California.
Our campus also involved political protest in those tumultuous times. Ten students at Southwest Texas State University took part in a protest on campus, but were suspended and expelled from the university.
Check out this brief video by The University Star: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ygdK1awjMA#t=15
Also, listen to this NPR report broadcast on Oct. 28, 2002, in which two of the San Marcos Ten were interviewed: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=1131946&m=131946
After you watch and listen to this reports, return here and add a comment with your reaction. Also, consider whether there are any causes -- political, environmental, social or otherwise -- that would motivate you to take part in a protest.
Please remember to include your first name, last name initial, and your class (Summer I).
Our campus also involved political protest in those tumultuous times. Ten students at Southwest Texas State University took part in a protest on campus, but were suspended and expelled from the university.
Check out this brief video by The University Star: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ygdK1awjMA#t=15
Also, listen to this NPR report broadcast on Oct. 28, 2002, in which two of the San Marcos Ten were interviewed: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=1131946&m=131946
After you watch and listen to this reports, return here and add a comment with your reaction. Also, consider whether there are any causes -- political, environmental, social or otherwise -- that would motivate you to take part in a protest.
Please remember to include your first name, last name initial, and your class (Summer I).
Monday, June 1, 2015
Welcome, Summer I 2015 Class!
Welcome to my Media Law blog. I use this blog as a teaching tool that
allows me to comment on current events and topics related to media law.
It also allows you to participate in discussions involving media law
topics.
As the name of the blog suggests, I want you to use this forum to speak freely about the topics that we will discuss in MC 4301 Mass Communication Law & Ethics.
We will discuss some controversial topics -- and often, we may not agree. You may not agree with me, or you may not agree with your classmates.
But this is a forum of expression, so you have the right to express your opinion. My opinion is not correct just because I'm the instructor. You should feel free to disagree with me.
Think about this as the First Amendment in practice.
A few ground rules, please. Some of our discussions may become heated. While you have the right to express your opinion, I urge you to be considerate of others, especially those with whom you disagree. Avoid attacking or belittling someone just because you disagree with his or her opinion. And, I suggest you double check your comment for grammar, clarity and sensitivity before you post.
With your comment, please include your first name and initial of your last name. Also, include your class (Summer I). I need this information to keep track of your comments for participation points.
You can get an idea of how I used this blog in past semesters, though you are not responsible for reading or commenting on previous blog entries.
Now, let's start with something light.
Share with us a favorite book, movie, TV show, song, etc., that is related to law, then tell us why it's your favorite.
I'll go first. In past semesters, the movie I would call my favorite is "Twelve Angry Men" -- the original with Henry Fonda. But in 2012, I saw Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln" and was thoroughly impressed. The movie recounts President Lincoln's effort to encourage Congress to pass the Thirteen Amendment, which abolished slavery. A movie about passing a constitutional amendment? How perfect for a media law prof!
I look forward to reading your comments.
As the name of the blog suggests, I want you to use this forum to speak freely about the topics that we will discuss in MC 4301 Mass Communication Law & Ethics.
We will discuss some controversial topics -- and often, we may not agree. You may not agree with me, or you may not agree with your classmates.
But this is a forum of expression, so you have the right to express your opinion. My opinion is not correct just because I'm the instructor. You should feel free to disagree with me.
Think about this as the First Amendment in practice.
A few ground rules, please. Some of our discussions may become heated. While you have the right to express your opinion, I urge you to be considerate of others, especially those with whom you disagree. Avoid attacking or belittling someone just because you disagree with his or her opinion. And, I suggest you double check your comment for grammar, clarity and sensitivity before you post.
With your comment, please include your first name and initial of your last name. Also, include your class (Summer I). I need this information to keep track of your comments for participation points.
You can get an idea of how I used this blog in past semesters, though you are not responsible for reading or commenting on previous blog entries.
Now, let's start with something light.
Share with us a favorite book, movie, TV show, song, etc., that is related to law, then tell us why it's your favorite.
I'll go first. In past semesters, the movie I would call my favorite is "Twelve Angry Men" -- the original with Henry Fonda. But in 2012, I saw Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln" and was thoroughly impressed. The movie recounts President Lincoln's effort to encourage Congress to pass the Thirteen Amendment, which abolished slavery. A movie about passing a constitutional amendment? How perfect for a media law prof!
I look forward to reading your comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)