“They Said What?! I’ll Sue!” – Litigating Defamatory Claims – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
Impact of Mickey Mouse on public domain. The latest artificial intelligence and intellectual property cases - Thaler lost again. Nirvana Nevermind baby gets day in court. Tolkien estate and more.
(Podcast) The Briefing: IP Rights and the “Public Good” Exemption to California’s Anti-SLAPP Law: An Update
The Briefing: IP Rights and the “Public Good” Exemption to California’s Anti-SLAPP Law: An Update
Roundup of 2023 Entertainment Law Cases: Analysis SAG/AFTRA and WGA contracts, No Parody of Iconic Sneaker, AI Copyright Highlights China vs US law; SCOTUS Bad Spaniel and Warhol/Prince.
(Podcast) The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
Podcast: The Briefing - Deepfakes vs Right of Publicity: Navigating the Intersection Between Free Speech and Protected Rights
The Briefing - Deepfakes vs Right of Publicity: Navigating the Intersection Between Free Speech and Protected Rights
Early Returns Law and Politics with Jan Baran: Bradley Smith – Deregulating Political Speech Through Campaign Finance
What's the Tea in L&E? Government Employers: Is it Free Speech or Just Freely Complaining?
“So Many First Amendment Violations, So Little Time” | Tom Leatherbury | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Section 230: A Springboard to a First Amendment Discussion
SPECIAL EDITION: NEWS + VIEWS + TO DO’S | ERIN HIGGINS, CONN KAVANAUGH
Employment Law Now V-99- Vaccines, Masks, and Other Big Developments
Law Brief ®: Richard Schoenstein and Ian Rosenberg Discuss the Fight for Free Speech
Employment Law Now V-96- LOTS of Big Employment Law Developments
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 285: Listen and Learn -- First Amendment (Content-Neutral Restrictions)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 123: Listen and Learn -- First Amendment (Content-Neutral Restrictions)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which governs federal districts in the West/Northwest, recently held that a California school board member violated the First Amendment when blocking users’ ability to access...more
“SLAPP” is an acronym for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. The term was coined in the 1980s to describe lawsuits initiated to silence public speech about issues of public importance. Under the original...more
As discussed in our recent article, the introduction of SB 399 in California (approved and added as California Labor Code section 1137) sparked significant discussion and concern among California employers with union...more
As we reported here, California’s Senate Bill (S.B.) 399, took effect on January 1, 2025. This law prohibits employers from requiring employees to attend meetings about the company’s opinions on political or religious...more
On September 30, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law SB 399, the “California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act.” SB 399, which goes into effect on January 1, 2025, will prohibit employers from holding...more
In a state as diverse and politically active as California, employers are bound to encounter clashing political expressions among employees this election cycle. Navigating these challenges and enforcing policies affecting the...more
In its recent opinions in Linke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, the U.S. Supreme Court considered if and when public officials violate the First Amendment rights of members of the public by blocking them from the...more
Last year, I commented on the likely unconstitutionality of two California laws compelling forced speech...more
California's Anti-SLAPP statute is intended to cut short lawsuits "brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition . . .". Cal. Code Civ. Proc § 425.16(a) ...more
In the case of Martinez v. Zoom Info Technologies, the Ninth Circuit addressed the “Public Interest” exemption to California’s anti-SLAPP law. Scott Hervey and James Kachmar talk about this case on this episode of The...more
Under California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”), businesses are required to give “clear and reasonable warnings” to consumers regarding potential chemical exposure if their product contains a chemical “known to the state to...more
On April 7, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Porter v. Martinez, which addresses California’s law that prohibits honking a car horn except to warn of a safety hazard. Here, Susan Porter drove...more
Last week, I wrote about an unsuccessful challenge to the activities of the Office of Elections Cybersecurity within the California Secretary of State's office: Is The California Secretary of State Monitoring What You Publish...more
In 2018, the California legislature established a "ministry of truth" within the California Secretary of State's office - the Office of Elections Cybersecurity. By statute, the OEC has a duty “to monitor and counteract false...more
Last year, the California legislature enacted statutory changes ostensibly to limit the spread of misinformation and disinformation about COVID-19 by licensed physicians. 2022 Cal. Stats. ch. 938 (AB 2098)....more
Last year, the California legislature enacted statutory changes ostensibly to limit the spread of misinformation and disinformation about COVID-19 by licensed physicians. 2022 Cal. Stats. ch. 938 (AB 2098). Two California...more
Yesterday's post concerned the California Court of Appeal's holding that statements made in a Form 10-K were "protected activity" under California's Anti-SLAPP statute because they were made "in connection with an issue under...more
Under California's Anti-SLAPP law, a defendant may bring a special motion to strike any cause of action "arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United...more
Currently, charities are only required to disclose the names of their major donors to the IRS – which must keep them under seal – on federal Schedule B. The Supreme Court is set to schedule arguments in April for two...more