Comments on: This post written by my research assistant http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/this_post_writt.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:18:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Kaimi http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/this_post_writt.html/comment-page-1#comment-43640 Kaimi Thu, 02 Apr 2009 02:10:41 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/03/this-post-written-by-my-research-assistant.html#comment-43640 Deven's article suggests the need for some level of property protection that is not directly tied to copyright, yes. Deven’s article suggests the need for some level of property protection that is not directly tied to copyright, yes.

]]> By: A.J. Sutter http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/this_post_writt.html/comment-page-1#comment-43639 A.J. Sutter Thu, 02 Apr 2009 00:55:53 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/03/this-post-written-by-my-research-assistant.html#comment-43639 Thanks for your explantion. So it sounds like you're talking about a natural rights sort of property, rather than copyright? or at least a natural-rights "penumubra" to copyright? Thanks for your explantion. So it sounds like you’re talking about a natural rights sort of property, rather than copyright? or at least a natural-rights “penumubra” to copyright?

]]> By: Kaimi http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/this_post_writt.html/comment-page-1#comment-43638 Kaimi Wed, 01 Apr 2009 23:39:06 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/03/this-post-written-by-my-research-assistant.html#comment-43638 A.J., I'm following up on Deven's specific argument here. In a small nutshell (but you really should read the whole article), it's this: People are often expressing themselves online, but often in ways that technically don't give them a property right in the expression. You don't have a full property right in your Yahoo mail account, or your Twitter stream, or your Facebook account. They are limited (often a lot) by existing 3P contracts. Deven suggests that there are arguments for giving stronger property protections to those expressions. E.g., if Twitter decides to seize my account, I have an argument that it is connected to both my labor and my personhood, and that I should get some property protection. In this post, I'm suggesting that those arguments are less compelling in the case of ghostwriters. A.J.,

I’m following up on Deven’s specific argument here. In a small nutshell (but you really should read the whole article), it’s this:

People are often expressing themselves online, but often in ways that technically don’t give them a property right in the expression. You don’t have a full property right in your Yahoo mail account, or your Twitter stream, or your Facebook account. They are limited (often a lot) by existing 3P contracts. Deven suggests that there are arguments for giving stronger property protections to those expressions. E.g., if Twitter decides to seize my account, I have an argument that it is connected to both my labor and my personhood, and that I should get some property protection.

In this post, I’m suggesting that those arguments are less compelling in the case of ghostwriters.

]]> By: A.W. http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/this_post_writt.html/comment-page-1#comment-43637 A.W. Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:42:48 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/03/this-post-written-by-my-research-assistant.html#comment-43637 Btw, why is everyone all of a sudden fascinated by twitter? Btw, why is everyone all of a sudden fascinated by twitter?

]]> By: A.J. Sutter http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/03/this_post_writt.html/comment-page-1#comment-43636 A.J. Sutter Wed, 01 Apr 2009 05:32:50 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2009/03/this-post-written-by-my-research-assistant.html#comment-43636 I'm not clear on how the theoretical issues necessarily arise in this case. I'd expect most ghostwriters for celebrities are writing pursuant to an employment relationship, or else under a contract that likely provides for an assignment of copyright to the celebrity (or some enity controlled by the celebrity). Why wouldn't the celeb be standing in the shoes of the creator, in that case? Or are you saying that there ought to be diminished protection, on both labor and persona grounds, in <i>all</i> work-made-for-hire/assignment situations? (BTW, that last question is asked in a curious, not shocked, tone of voice.) I’m not clear on how the theoretical issues necessarily arise in this case. I’d expect most ghostwriters for celebrities are writing pursuant to an employment relationship, or else under a contract that likely provides for an assignment of copyright to the celebrity (or some enity controlled by the celebrity).

Why wouldn’t the celeb be standing in the shoes of the creator, in that case? Or are you saying that there ought to be diminished protection, on both labor and persona grounds, in all work-made-for-hire/assignment situations? (BTW, that last question is asked in a curious, not shocked, tone of voice.)

]]>