On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Advanced Copyright Law 2018: Current Issues

Released on: Mar. 22, 2018
Running Time: 06:04:49

As copyright law continues to become increasingly complex in the face of new technologies and new ways of doing business, it is more important than ever to stay up-to-date.  In order to continue to provide the sophisticated, pragmatic legal advice your clients expect, attend this program where you will learn about the latest developments from a group of leading experts on copyright law. The speakers at this advanced seminar will address critical issues in copyright law, drawing on their extensive experience and judgment.

Current developments will be explored in the context of developed law and proposals and prospects for future change. The faculty will invite and answer questions to be sure those attending the program receive information relevant to their practice. This program is designed for experienced practitioners in the field of copyright law who need to know the latest developments in this field.

Lecture Topics [Total RunTime: 06:04:49]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
  • Opening Remarks* [00:05:09]
    Richard Dannay
  • Is “Transformative Fair Use” Being Transformed? [01:05:26]
    Linda J. Steinman
  • Substantial Similarity: Do We Know It When We See It? [00:57:28]
    Joshua L. Simmons
  • “Conceptual Separability”: Has Star Athletica Resolved the Confusion? [01:00:01]
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • DMCA Roundup [01:00:13]
    Lateef Mtima
  • Music Copyright Developments in Court and Elsewhere [00:57:09]
    Judith Finell
  • Litigation Update and Developments [00:59:23]
    Raymond J. Dowd

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK

  • Copyright Injunctions and Fair Use: Enter eBay—Four-Factor Fatigue or Four-Factor Freedom? (The 37th Annual Donald C. Brace Memorial Lecture)
    Richard Dannay
  • Factorless Fair Use? Was Melville Nimmer Right?
    Richard Dannay
  • Is “Transformative Fair Use” Being Transformed? (January 2018)
    Linda J. Steinman, Alison Schary, Jaya Kasibhatla
  • Substantial Similarity: Do We Know It When We See It?
    Jacob Victor, Joshua L. Simmons
  • Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, “Star Athletica v. Varsity: Ceci N’est Pas Une…Useful Article,” Law 360 (March 26, 2017)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • Brief for the Petitioner, Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., Case No. 15-866 (U.S. July 2016)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • Brief for the Respondents, Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., Case No. 15-866 (U.S. Sept. 14, 2016)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • Reply Brief for the Petitioner, Star Athletica L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., Case No. 15-866 (U.S. Oct. 2016)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Respondents, Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., Case No. 15-866 (U.S. Sept. 2016)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., Case No. 15-866 (U.S. Mar. 22, 2017)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • U.S. Copyright Office, Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Chapter 900: Visual Arts Works, §§ 923.3–924.3 (Third Edition, December 22, 2014)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • U.S. Copyright Office: Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Chapter 900: Visual Arts Works, §§ 923.3–924 (Third Edition, September 29, 2017)
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • From Safe Harbors to Circumventing Technology Blockades: Navigating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
    Lateef Mtima
  • Scandalous Notes: A Musicologist Discusses New Developments in Music Technology that Challenge Copyright Attorneys and Expert Witnesses, NYSBA Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Journal, Special Edition 2008, Vol. 19, No. 1
    Judith Greenberg Finell
  • Unblurring the Lines: Navigating the Complex Relationship Between Technology, Music & Copyright Law (PowerPoint slides)
    Judith Greenberg Finell
  • PLI Advanced Topics in Copyright 2018: Litigation Update
    Raymond J. Dowd, Sam Blaustein

Presentation Material

  • Is "Transformative Fair Use" Being Transformed?
    Linda J. Steinman
  • Substantial Similarity: Do We Know It When We See It?
    Joshua L. Simmons
  • Illustration: Loop Chair
    Richard Dannay
  • Varsity Brands: The Curious Case of Separability in Copyright Law
    Jacqueline C. Charlesworth
  • Unblurring the Lines: Navigating the Complex Relationship between Technology, Music & Copyright Law
    Judith Finell
  • Advanced Topics in Copyright Litigation Update
    Raymond J. Dowd
Chairperson(s)
Richard Dannay ~ Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C. , Past President, The Copyright Society of the U.S.A.
Speaker(s)
Jacqueline C. Charlesworth ~ Covington & Burling LLP
Raymond J. Dowd ~ Dunnington Bartholow and Miller LLP
Judith Finell ~ Musicologist, Judith Finell MusicServices, Inc.
Lateef Mtima ~ Director, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice, Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law
Joshua L. Simmons ~ Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Linda J. Steinman ~ Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Advanced Copyright Law 2019: Current Issues (New York, NY) Mar. 14, 2019

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Advanced Copyright Law 2018: Current Issues Richard Dannay, Past President, The Copyright Society of the U.S.A.
 
Share
Email
Loved it. One of the most informative and fast-paced CLEs.”
Margarita Coale, Miller Egan Molter & Nelson LLP

I love attending this program every year, in part because the presenters make it so entertaining- the subject matter is naturally interesting, but the speakers make a difference and the ones at PLI are terrific at keeping our interest while imparting huge quantities of information and summarizing vast quantities of cases.”
Margo Lynn Hablutzel, DXC.technology

“Very informative and great speakers. Topics kept my attention the entire time.”
Catherine Janik, Assurant Inc.

“Very interesting and well presented.”
Eloise Maki, 3M


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.