Brief Amici Curiae of the Progressive Intellectual Property Law Association and the Union for the Public Domain in Partial Support of Petitioners in the Matter of Eric Eldred, et al. v. John Ashcroft, U.S. Attorney General (United States Supreme Court No. 01-618)

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Pekarek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Property Law ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Partial Support ◽  
The Public

James Iredell

2019 ◽  
pp. 178-196
Author(s):  
Willis P. Whichard
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
George Washington ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Revolutionary Era ◽  
The Public

This essay examines the public career of James Iredell, who was probably Revolutionary-era North Carolina’s most influential propagandist. His first published essay, which appeared in September 1773, defended the jurisdiction of colonial courts in the foreign attachment controversy, and he was one of the first Whig writers to reject the sovereignty of Parliament in America. During the Revolution, Iredell continued to write on behalf of the American cause, but financial woes limited his political activities. During the debate over the ratification of the Constitution, however, Iredell emerged as one of North Carolina’s most energetic Federalists, and George Washington rewarded him with an appointment to the United States Supreme Court. Like many southern Federalists, Iredell supported the new government, but was wary of pushing federal power too far, and in his best known opinion, a dissent in Chisholm v. Georgia (1793), he argued that a state could not be sued in federal court without its consent.

scholarly journals Case of Misplaced Technology

2010 ◽  
Vol 132 (06) ◽  
pp. 47-47
Author(s):  
Kirk Teska
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Court Hearing

This article demonstrates through several examples of misplaced technology and clash between intellectual property laws and freedom of speech. The first example stated in the article is that of an Apple engineer leaving his prototype next-generation iPhone in a bar and it ended up at gizmodo.com—a website devoted to technology. The folks at Gizmodo tore into the iPhone, confirmed its authenticity, and then put photographs of the phone along with a list of its new features on the gizmodo.com site. Apple, rather than suing, at least so far, simply asked for the prototype phone back and Gizmodo complied. Could Apple sue Gizmodo or would First Amendment protect Gizmodo, only depending upon certain different factors and to an extent on the particular court hearing the case. The ultimate authority on the First Amendment, the United States Supreme Court, generally loathes limiting free speech for any reason.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document