Copyright: legal and cultural perspectives
I. References in the schedule and assignments
Download 271.57 Kb.
|
I. References in the schedule and assignmentsA&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. 239 F. 3rd 1004 (9th Cir. 2001) http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm American Geophysical Union v. Texaco, 60 F.3d 913 (2d Cir. 1994) http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/60_F3d_913.htm Bardach, Eugene. (2000). A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path to more effective problem solving. New York: Chatham House. Barthes, Roland. (1977). Death of the author (Trans. Stephen Heath). In Stephen Heath (Ed.), Image music text (pp. 142-148). New York: Hill and Wang. http://faculty.smu.edu/dfoster/theory/Barthes.htm Bollier, David. (2007). The growth of the commons paradigm. In Charlotte Hess & Elinor Ostrom (Eds.), Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice (pp. 27-40). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CD Boyle, James. (1996). Shamans, software, & spleens: Law and the construction of the information society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Boyle, James. (Ed.) (2003a). Collected papers: Duke conference on the public domain. Durham, NC: Center for the Public Domain. [Also a special issue of Law and Contemporary Problems, 66(1-2), 1-483.] Also available at http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/lcp/ Boyle, James. (2003b). Foreword: The opposite of property? In James Boyle (Ed.), Collected papers: Duke conference on the public domain (pp. 1-32). Durham, NC: Center for the Public Domain. [This monograph also appeared as a special issue of Law and Contemporary Problems, 66(1-2), 1-483.] Boyle, James. (2008). The public domain: Enclosing the commons of the mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University. Brown, Michael F. (2003a). Introduction. In Who owns native culture? (pp. 1-10 and 255-256). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. CD Brown, Michael F. (2003b). Cultures and copyrights. In Who owns native culture? (pp. 43-69 and 261-265). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. CD Brown, Michael F. (2003c). sources on indigenous cultural rights. In Who owns native culture? (pp. 299-301). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. CD Carroll, Terry. (2004). Copyright law FAQ (4/6): International aspects. http://www.faqs.org/faqs/law/copyright/faq/part4/ Doty, P. (2001a). Digital privacy: Toward a new politics and discursive practice. In Martha E. Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 115-245). Medford, NJ: Information Today. Doty, Philip. (2001b). Policy analysis and networked information: “There are eight million stories . . . .” In Charles R. McClure & John Carlo ?Bertot (Eds.), Evaluating networked information services: Techniques, policy, and issues (pp. 213-253). Medford, NJ: Information Today. Doty, Philip. (Forthcoming 2011). Privacy, reading, and trying out identity: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act and technological determinism. In William Aspray & Philip Doty (Eds.), Creating privacy: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. Dunn, William N. (1994). Public policy analysis: An introduction (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003) [read majority + both dissents] http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-618.ZS.html Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2010, March). Unintended consequences: Twelve years under the DMCA. https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca Elkin-Koren, Niva. (2000). The privatization of information policy. Ethics and Information Technology, 2(4), 201-209. Also available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/3lugryckutjl/?p=9ed7fd02ace24e7c958a892c69b44039&pi=27 Feist v. Rural Telephone, 499 U.S. 340 (1991) http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/499_US_340.htm Ford, Richard Thompson. (1995). Facts and values in pragmatism and personhood [Review of the book Reinterpreting property (by Margaret Radin)]. Stanford Law Review, 18(1), 217-246. Also available at http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/journals/00389765.html?cookieSet=1 Foucault, Michel. (1984), What is an author? In Paul Rabinow (Ed.), The Foucault reader (pp. 101-120). New York: Pantheon Books. CD Garrity, Brian. (1999). Conflict between Maori and western concepts of intellectual property. Auckland University Law Review, 8(4), 1193-1210. Also available at http://www.heinonline.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/auck8&id=1&size=2&collection=journals&index=journals/auck Gillespie, Tarleton. (2007). Wired shut: Copyright and the shape of digital culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT. Goldstein, Paul. (2003). Copyright’s highway: From Gutenberg to the celestial jukebox (rev. ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Hardin, Garrett. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243-1248. Also available at http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/stable/i299458 Hess, Charlotte, & Ostrom, Elinor. (Eds.). (2007b). Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Jaszi, Peter. (1994). On the author effect: Contemporary copyright and collective creativity. In Martha Woodmansee & Peter Jaszi (Eds.), The construction of authorship: Textual appropriation in law and literature (pp. 29-56). Durham, NC: Duke University. CD Jaszi, Peter, & Woodmansee, Martha. (1994). Introduction. In Martha Woodmansee & Peter Jaszi (Eds.), The construction of authorship: Textual appropriation in law and literature (pp. 1-13). Durham, NC: Duke University. CD Kamuf, Peggy. (1988). On literary property. In Signature pieces: On the institution of authorship (pp. 59-67). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. CD Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. (2003), 336 F. 3d 811, 9th circuit http://images.chillingeffects.org/cases/Kelly_v_Arriba.html Kranich, Nancy. (2007). Countering enclosure: Reclaiming the knowledge commons. In Charlotte Hess & Elinor Ostrom (Eds.), Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice (pp. 85-122). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CD Legislative history of anti-circumvention provisions. (n.d.). http://www2.ari.net/hrrc/html/_black_box__legislative_histor.html Lessig, Lawrence. (2001a). The future of ideas: The fate of the commons in a connected world. New York: Random House. Lessig, Lawrence. (2004b). Free culture: How big media uses [sic] technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity. New York: Penguin. Lessig, Lawrence. (2004c). The creative commons. Montana Law Review, 65(1), 1-4. Also available at http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T5460971488&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T5460971491&cisb=22_T5460971490&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=222557&docNo=3 Litman, Jessica. (2001). Digital copyright. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Litman, Jessica. (2007). Creative reading. Law & Contemporary Problems, 70(2), 175-183. Also available at http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?70+Law+&+Contemp.+Probs.+175+(spring+2007) Lougee, Wendy Pradt. (2007). Scholarly communication and libraries unbound: The opportunity of the commons. In Charlotte Hess & Elinor Ostrom (Eds.), Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice (pp. 311-332). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CD Lury, Celia. (1993a). From repetition to replication. In Cultural rights: Technology, legality and personality (pp. 13-38). London: Routledge. CD Lury, Celia. (1993b). Mechanical reproduction: Print, literacy and the public sphere. In Cultural rights: Technology, legality and personality (pp. 97-120). London: Routledge. CD Majchrzak, Ann. (1984). Methods for policy research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. 545 US 1913 (2005) http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/ Netanel, Neil [Weinstock]. (2008). Why has copyright expanded? Analysis and critique. In Fiona Macmillan (Ed.), New directions in copyright laws (vol. 6). Also available at SSRN http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1066241 Okediji, Ruth. (1999). Perspectives on globalization from developing states: Copyright and public welfare in global perspective. CD Pyle, Christopher. (1989). How to brief a case. http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html (Original published 1982) Radin, Margaret. (1982). Property and personhood. Stanford Law Review, 34(5), 957-1015. Also available at http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/browse/00389765/ap040173?frame=noframe&userID=80533f15@utexas.edu/01c0a8487400504f6f1&dpi=3&config=jstor Radin, Margaret. (1987). Market-inalienability. Harvard Law Review, 100(8), 1849-1937. Also available at http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/stable/i257571 Radin, Margaret. (1993). Introduction: Property and pragmatism. In Reinterpreting property (pp. 1-34 and 203-205). Chicago: University of Chicago. CD Rice, David A. (2002). Copyright as talisman: Expanding “property” in digital works. International Review of Law, Computers, & Technology, 16(2), 113-132. Also available at http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=109&sid=a202e99d-491d-4feb-a517-fc5b7ce080af%40sessionmgr107 Rist, Ray C. (2000). Influencing the policy process with qualitative research. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 1001-1017). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Roe, Emery. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Durham, NC: Duke University. Rose, Mark. (1988). The author as proprietor: Donaldson v. Becket and the geneology of modern authorship. Representations, 23, 51-85. Also available at http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/browse/07346018/dm990292?frame=noframe&userID=80533f15@utexas.edu/01c0a8487400504f6f1&dpi=3&config=jstor Rose, Mark. (2002a). Copyright and its metaphors. UCLA Law Review, 50(1), 1-15. http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/uclalr50&id=15&collection=journals Rose, Mark. (2002b). Nine-tenths of the law: The English copyright debates and the rhetoric of the public domain. Law & Contemporary Problems, 66(75), 75-87. http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?66+Law+&+Contemp.+Probs.+75+(WinterSpring+200) Russell, Carrie. (2004). Complete copyright: An everyday guide for librarians. Washington, DC: American Library Association, Office for Information Technology Policy. Schön, Donald A. (1993). Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 137-163). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Sony v. Universal City Studios, 464 U.S. 417 (1984) http://www.eff.org/Legal/Cases/sony_v_universal_decision.html U. S. Congress. Library of Congress. Copyright Office. (2009). Copyright of the United States. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ U.S. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. (1986). Summary. In Intellectual property rights in an age of electronics and information (pp. 3-15). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. http://www.wws.Princeton.EDU/~ota/ns20/alpha_f.html Vaidhyanathan, Siva. (2001). Copyrights and copywrongs: The rise of intellectual property and how it threatens creativity. New York: New York University Press. Vaidhyanathan, Siva. (2004). The anarchist in the library: How the clash between freedom and control is hacking the real world and crashing the system. New York: Basic Books. Warren, Karen J. (1999). Introduction: A philosophical perspective on the ethics and resolution of cultural property issues. In Phyllis Mauch Messenger (Ed.), The ethics of collecting cultural property: Whose culture? Whose property? (2nd ed., pp. 1-25). Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico. CD Woodmansee, Martha. (1994). On the author effect: Recovering collectivity. In Martha Woodmansee & Peter Jaszi (Eds.), The construction of authorship: Textual appropriation in law and literature (pp. 15-28). Durham, NC: Duke University. CD II. Selected Other Court Cases Baystate v. Bowers Discussion. (2003). http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/baystatevbowersdiscussion.htm Blizzard Entertainment Inc. v. Jung (2005), 8th Cir., No. 04-3654, September 1 Folsom v. Marsh, 9 9 F. Cas. 342 (C.C.D. Mass. 1841) Greenwich Workshop, Inc. v. Tinker Creations, Inc. 932 F. Supp. 1210, C. D. Cal. 1996 http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/greenwichvtimber.htm Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, Inc., 471 US 539 (1985) http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/harperandrow.html Intellectual Reserve, Inc. v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc., 75 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (D. Ut. Central Division 1999) http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/cjoyce/copyright/release10/IntRes.html Lee v. A.R.T. Co., 125 F. 3d 580 CA 7 (Ill.) 1997 http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/125_F3d_580.htm Lochner v. New York 98 U.S. 45 (1905) http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/historic/query=%5BGroup+198+U.S.+45:%5D(%5BLevel+Case+Citation:%5D%7C%5BGroup+citemenu:%5D)/doc/%7B@1%7D/hit_headings/words=4/hits_only New York Times et al. v. Tasini et al. No. 00-201 (2001a) [majority opinion] http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-201.ZS.html New York Times et al. v. Tasini et al. No. 00-201 (2001b) [dissent] http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/00-201P.ZD Princeton University Press, v. Michigan Document Services, 99 F.3d 1381 (6th Cir. 1996) http://www.law.emory.edu/6circuit/nov96/96a0357p.06.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/323_F3d_805.htm Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken. 422 U.S. 151, 156 (1975). United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. 334 U.S. 131, 158 (1948). United States v. Elcom, Ltd., 203 F.Supp. 2d 1111 (N.D. Cal. 2002) http://www.digital-law-online.com/cases/62PQ2D1736.htm Universal City Studios Inc. v. Eric Corley et al., 273 F.2d 429 (2d Cir. 2001) http://www.nd.edu/~pbellia/corley.pdf Download 271.57 Kb. Share with your friends:
|