About The CLJ       About the Authors       Endorsements       Subscription Information       Contact Us       Log In  


The November-December 2016 edition of The Copyright Law Journal will be the last for now. We are leaving open the possibility of publishing the journal on a less rigorous schedule and may issue special updates when significant copyright law developments warrant.

The Copyright Law Journal was a labor of love for Neil Boorstyn and, more recently, Linda Joy Kattwinkel. Unfortunately, we have found it no longer sustainable to publish the Journal on a quarterly basis. If you have paid for a subscription beyond December 2016, we will refund your money pro rata. Going forward we will let current and past subscribers know if publication resumes and will use the subscriber list to disseminate special issues. The Copyright Law Journal website will remain active for several months to allow subscribers continued access to this issue and the library of past issues.

Thank you for your support of Neil, Linda Joy, and The Copyright Law Journal.

The Copyright Law Journal brings you in-depth analysis of recent important cases in copyright law. In each issue, several cases are discussed, analyzed, and placed into perspective with decisions by other courts. The Copyright Law Journal was founded, and solely written, by Neil Boorstyn from 1984 through the Mar-April 2016 issue. Neil, who passed away on March 1, 2016, was Of Counsel to current publisher of The Copyright Law Journal, Owen, Wickersham & Erickson, P.C.. Neil was one of the country's leading copyright and computer law experts. Under the new authorship of Linda Joy Kattwinkel, Neil's student, mentee and colleague, The Copyright Law Journal continues to provide the valuable and unique perspective of a seasoned copyright practitioner. Read a tribute to Neil here.

Sample case and analysis
We invite you to read a sample case from The Copyright Law Journal, containing summary, facts, and extensive comments and practice tips. View a sample case

In the latest issue of The Copyright Law Journal:

TCA TV CORP. V. McCOLLUM: The Second Circuit held that verbatim use of slightly more than a minute of Abbott & Costello’s “Who’s On First” routine in a Broadway play was not fair use
STEVENS V. CORELOGIC, INC.: The Southern District of California held that automated removal of copyright management information does not constitute a violation of the DMCA
GOLDSTEIN V. METROPOLITAN REGIONAL INFORMATION SYS., INC.: The Maryland District Court held that automated addition of a false copyright notice may constitute a violation of the DMCA
BRIEFLY NOTED: Flo & Eddie, Inc. v Sirius XM Radio, Inc.


Under the first fair use factor, the critical inquiry is whether the new work uses the copyrighted material itself for a purpose, or imbues it with a character, different from that for which it was created.
Under the DMCA, a plaintiff bears the burden not only of establishing when CMI metadata was removed and by whom, but also that such removal was done with the intention to encourage or conceal infringement.
A cause of action for “constructive alteration” of CMI may be viable where the defendant did not remove CMI but added its own competing copyright notice to plaintiff’s works.

To read this and other issues, subscribe today


Subscribe today

  Already subscribed?
  Log in for the latest issue:

  User ID:
Need Log In help?

Privacy Policy    

The Copyright Law Journal :
Providing helpful guidance and practice tips since 1984