Click link to view PDF (opens in new window)
Nicollette Brandt, Louboutin's Trademark Suit Against Yves Saint Laurent: Creating a Color War in the Fashion Industry, 8 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 58 (2012)
"In January 2008, Christian Louboutin S.A., Christian Louboutin L.L.C., and Christian Louboutin obtained trademark protection for the now infamous 'Red-Sole Mark' from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The certificate of registration claimed protection over 'the color(s) red . . .' and '. . . a lacquered red-sole on footwear.' After years of use in commerce, secondary meaning had been established and trademark protection of the “Red-Sole Mark” was granted. Competitors attempted to duplicate Louboutin’s red-soled shoes, but Louboutin actively policed the 'Red-Sole Mark' to shut down copyists. In April 2011, after urging fellow designer Yves Saint Laurent to discontinue his production of red-soled shoes, specifically the Tribute, Tribtoo, Palais, and Woodstock models in YSL’s Cruise 2011 Collection, each bearing a bright red sole as part of a monochromatic design, Louboutin filed a trademark infringement suit against YSL asserting multiple claims under the Lanham Act and requesting a preliminary injunction. YSL responded with several counterclaims, including a request for cancellation of the 'Red-Sole Mark.' In August 2011, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that the designer was not entitled to a preliminary injunction to enjoin Yves Saint Laurent from using a red outsole on its own shoe design. . . . An analysis of the decision reveals that the district court erred in its evaluation of Louboutin’s 'Red-Sole Mark' by ignoring both the Lanham Act and controlling precedent in trademark law."
Todd E, Saucedo, The Quandary of Being Interactive: The Impact of Arista Records v. Launch Media on the Viability of Webcasting Services, 6 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 50 (2010)
"The advent of the Internet helped spawn an age of user based interactivity that brought forth a new venue for the public performance of sound recordings, and with it a whole new set of complexities and questions for the recording industry and the holders of copyrights. Adding a further layer to the query, various methods and means came into use that allowed the transfer and streaming of music in ways that had been unimaginable to both the recording industry and to lawmakers just a decade prior. . . . Beyond mere peer to peer file sharing, another concern that caught the attention of the record industry was that of “streaming audio,” or “webcasting.” Streaming allows an Internet user to listen to music via the web without having to download and permanently store audio files onto their computers, essentially giving the listener access to whatever is playing on that station at that moment. A basic summation of webcasting is that “audio is transmitted over the Internet bit by bit, but never as a complete file,” thus preventing a “listener from record[ing] or sav[ing] a copy of the audio file.” The recording industry became increasingly concerned that the traditional balance that had existed between radio broadcasters and themselves would be disturbed, and that consumers would find alternative avenues to purchase music or at least find ways to circumvent the entire process of purchasing that would extract the recording industry’s products and “thus erode sales of recorded music.” Webcast streaming has evolved in different stages, resulting in several attempts by Congress, through multiple amendments to the Copyright Act of 1976, to categorize and more narrowly define the limitations of web streaming and its applications to copyright law."
Krist Caldwell, Three Chords and the Truth: Analyzing Copyright Infringement Claims Against Guitar Tablature Websites, 4 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 41 (2008)
The author examines the potential copyright infringement of internet tablature. After brief overviews of music theory, guitar tablature, and copyright law, this paper analyzes both internet tablature reproduced from existing tablature booklets and internet tablature created by ear. This paper concludes not only that internet tablature most likely infringes on copyrights but also that limiting the free sharing of internet tablature hinders an age-old tradition of learning among musicians.
Susan A. Russell, The Struggle over Webcasting--Where Is the Stream Carrying Us?, 1 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 13 (2004)
Susan A. Russell is currently completing her LL.M. in Intellectual Property Law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. In the fall of 2004, she will begin the J.S.D. program at the Berkeley School of Law. Below, Ms. Russell focuses on one facet of the Internet—webcasting. Part I of this article gives an overview of webcasting itself. Part II identifies the groups and their arguments in the debate over webcasting. Part III provides a critical review of the legislative history on webcasting by looking at the various acts passed by Congress. As webcasting significantly resembles radio broadcasting, the question is raised as to why Congress requires webcasters to pay royalty fees on any music they distribute over their lines, while not requiring the same for radiobroadcasters. Ms. Russell addresses this perplexity by providing comprehensible insight into the future of webcasting in Part IV.
Matt Sellers, Shifting the Burden to Internet Service Providers: The Validity of Subpoena Power Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 1 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 8 (2003)
Matt Sellers has extensive experience in computer programming and web development, including the creation of an ordering system and online streaming video program for Oklahoma lawyers pursuing Continuing Legal Education courses. He also worked as a web developer for Jupiter Media Metrix, where he used the Internet to promote IT events. Below, this author outlines recent litigation concerning Verizon Internet Services and Recording Industry Association of America, including an exploratory discussion on the issues of the constitutionality and the purview of subpoena power under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Sue Mota, Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox--One Can't Get Back by Trademark What One Gave Up Under Copyright, 1 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 7 (2003)
Ms. Mota is a professor of legal studies at Bowling Green State University. She obtained her J.D. from The University of Toledo College of Law and her M.A. and B.A. from Bowling Green State University. Below, Ms. Mota briefly outlines recent litigation concerning the unaccredited copying of an uncopyrighted work, and provides a critical analysis of the ethical dilemma arising out of Dastar.