the Mark Pike

"I remember that as I sat in one of my last classes before graduation in 2004, I signed up for..."

Sun, 15 Apr 2012 18:57:21 -0400

“I remember that as I sat in one of my last classes before graduation in 2004, I signed up for Facebook for the first time. Facebook didn’t exist before then, so there’s no way I could’ve known while at Duke that this is where I’d end up.”

- What Can You Do with a PPS Major? Work at Facebook | alumni.sanford.duke.edu

Recent interview I did for Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy. It was fun speaking with a current Duke undergrad and answering questions about my career.

Obama Loves You Back

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:37:00 -0400

When President Obama addresses an adoring crowd, people frequently interrupt his speech and shout “We love you Obama!” One of my favorite things about Obama is the way he says “I love you back.”

So I made a website to showcase it:

http://obamalovesyouback.com

I’ve been lucky enough to see President Obama speak on a number of occasions. He’s an incredible orator. Once, I even got to meet him. He seems super nice. What really stands out is the way he takes a crowd’s positive vibe, acknowledges it, and sends it right back. It’s a beautiful feedback loop.

Speaking of feedback loops, I’ve been amazed at the response this website has gotten in the 10 hours it’s been live. It only took me 10 minutes to make! And it’s already been sent all the way around the world.

Right now, the site has received the following positive feedback:

500,000+ Impressions on Facebook
Viewed by members of the Obama Campaign (including one who wrote “haha”)
UPDATE: The Official Barack Obama Tumblr gave the site some props

So what’s next?

Keep on sharing the site!
Reblog this on Tumblr, Tweet, Share on Facebook, Click the Like Button, Call your Mom and Dad, etc.
Tell friends and family “I love you back” in that patented President Obama tone.
Donate to the campaign
Give President Obama your support. Tell him “We love you Obama!”

Props to NY Mag for editing together some of the videos for a slideshow they did in 2010.

“I love you back.”

Internet Access for All

Fri, 06 Jan 2012 02:40:46 -0500

Vint Cerf, one of the “fathers of the Internet”, recently wrote an op-ed titled “Internet Access Is Not a Human Right.”

I see what Vint Cerf is saying, but it’s a semantic trick. Access to information is technically the “human right” that advocates are striving for when trying to bridge the digital divide. To create headlines like this detracts from that goal, all to make what point?

“Improving the Internet is just one means, albeit an important one, by which to improve the human condition. It must be done with an appreciation for the civil and human rights that deserve protection — without pretending that access itself is such a right.”

Yes, it’s just one means. But I don’t think those who seek more Internet access are doing so in a manner that lessens other civil and human rights movements.

Access to some essential information these days practically does require the Internet. Currently, 7 out of 10 people do not have internet access. The United Nations report Cerf references addresses this and analyzes the digital divide from both (a) lack of access to content; and, (b) lack of access to technical infrastructure.

Ultimately, the U.N. report finds that the Internet helps “enable individuals to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, but also a range of other human rights, and to promote the progress of society as a whole.”

I recently attended a friend-raiser A Human Right to explore solutions to provide access to more of the 5 billion people in the world without Internet access. One of the first jobs I had out of college was working at One Economy to help leverage technology to empower underserved communities. I’m passionate about continuing to make the world more open and connected through my current role at Facebook.

Thanks to Vint for helping build this thing to connect us. Let’s make sure everybody has a fair shot at using it.

Copyright and the 2008 Presidential Election

Sun, 03 Jul 2011 13:52:00 -0400

I wrote this paper in December 2008. Some of the topics came up recently in a discussion at work— and the media currently appears to be discussing the issue as well ever since a rock n’ roll star wrote a cease and desist letter to a presidential candidate. I thought I’d post it publicly in case anybody else is researching these type of matters.

MEMORANDUM

TO: Prof. Marcus
FROM: Mark Pike
SUBJECT: Copyright and the 2008 Presidential Election

This memorandum seeks to clarify potential issues in the area of copyright law and the campaign advertising industry through a brief survey of the 2008 presidential election, applicable case law, and theory.

Because of competing interests, there is a clear tension between the First Amendment and copyright law— the former seeks to preserve the rights of free speech while the latter provides a limitation.

By highlighting the struggle of applying copyright law in a modern election, this memorandum aims to help candidates to effectively deliver their message and successfully navigate the challenges of intellectual property rights in the political context.

Questions Presented:

Have advertisements traditionally received copyright protection?
Do political ads satisfy the creative threshold?
Which elements of political ads are eligible to receive copyright protection?
How does the fair use doctrine apply to political ads?

I. Advertisements with Creative Elements Enjoy Copyright Protection

a. Historical Context of Ads With Copyright Protection

Copyright law is built with the basic goal of innovation for the public’s welfare. It is derived from the Copyright Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which authorizes Congress to “promote the Progress of Science and Useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”¹ Although copyright law provides economic benefits, they appear to be merely ancillary while the primary goal is to encourage creativity for the sake of public welfare.²

There are a few requirements that must be satisfied to qualify for copyright protection. First, a work must be original; however, the bar that has been set for creativity is quite minimal. In fact, according to the Supreme Court, “the requisite level of creativity is extremely low; even a slight amount will suffice.”³ The other requirements included in the U.S. Copyright Act require that a work must be must be “fixed in any tangible medium of expression.”⁴ Once a work has been granted copyright protections, the holder has an “exclusive right” and can prohibit others from using the work without permission.

Before the turn of the 20^th century, courts often denied copyright protection for advertisements due to a perceived lack of artistic value and originality.⁵ In one case, Higgins v. Keuffel, the U.S. Supreme Court held that there would be no copyright protection on some types of writings, such as inkbottle labels, because they have “no possible influence upon science or useful arts.”⁶ However, subsequent rulings have undeniably established copyright protection for advertisements. The genesis of such a doctrine stems from Justice Holmes’ opinion in Bleistein, where the court recognized that advertisements contain individual copyrightable elements, namely the pictures:

A picture is nonetheless a picture, and nonetheless a subject of copyright, that it is used for an advertisement.⁷

The court extended its logic to declare that advertisements as a whole are therefore copyrightable.

However, it should be noted that the Court in Bleistein focused on the question of whether advertising furthered the goals of the Copyright Clause of the U.S. Constitution—chiefly, the progress of the Arts.⁸ Because of this focus, the Court potentially failed to adequately consider the grant of exclusive rights in advertising, and whether that also furthers the goals of the Copyright Clause of the U.S. Constitution.⁹

Some scholars argue that such an exclusive right restricts the free flow of commercial information, seemingly contrary to one aspect of the stated primary goal of copyright— to promote the public welfare.¹⁰ Moreover, in the realm of political advertising, restricting the flow of information and transparency could be detrimental to campaign messages, which highlights the conflict between the First Amendment and the Copyright Clause.

b. Political Ads are Creative

If there were any doubt that political advertisements rise to the level of creativity required to receive copyright protection, it is helpful to take a look at some of the work product that emerged from the design firms hired to work for Barack Obama and John McCain in the 2008 presidential election.

In an interview about creating Barack Obama’s now iconic “O” logo, graphic artist Sol Sender described the chance to work on campaign design as “an opportunity to do breakthrough work at the right time in what’s become a predictable graphic landscape.”¹¹ Sender had never worked on design strategy in the political context before, which he largely credits for his team’s success.¹² “The design expression was so constrained and so bland for so many years in politics”,¹³ Sender said in an interview after the election. His design team innovated by applying concepts learned in other marketing forms. For example, the “O” logo has been credited as one of the first political logos to utilize an emblem as the focus instead of the candidate’s name—¹⁴ an advance one could easily argue as “Progress in the Useful Arts”.¹⁵

And, the creative aspects of political graphic design are not just limited to the emblems in the logos, as evidenced by Sender’s elaboration on typographical elements—all conscious choices made by the campaign to express a certain message.¹⁶ The Obama campaign made heavy use of a modified Gotham typeface design scheme, which many branding experts have credited as instrumental to its success in conveying a message.¹⁷ Gotham translates to the digital medium extremely well; especially in the manner the Obama campaign implemented it, thereby allowing for wide dissemination to supporters in a reliably effective manner.¹⁸ In all of these instances, it is important to note that the campaign is controlling their image through organized distribution channels in a fixed, tangible medium.

A further exploration of political graphic design and logos reveals that John McCain utilized Optima, a sans serif typeface known by some as a “centrist font” for its serif tendencies.¹⁹ Furthermore, the McCain logo prominently featured a star, which references his service in the military and his campaign’s focus on the slogan “Country First”.

All of these characteristics of the elements of political advertising tend to indicate that the campaigns are acutely aware of the projections the voting public makes upon political propaganda. For example, bright blues and gradients with circular themes in this campaign cycle were thought to signify “Change” and “Hope”, whereas darker and bolder colors were thought to signify “Experience” and “Service.” This suggests that political campaigns face a graphic design challenge to successfully fuse their ideas with the most effective expression.

c. Idea-Expression Dichotomy

Because successful graphic designers in a political campaign are able to intertwine a candidate’s message with a visual representation, an analysis of the idea-expression dichotomy is necessary in order to distinguish which elements are protectable. Not all elements of a creative advertisement will automatically receive copyright protection. The creators of advertisements, particularly political ones, cannot get copyright protection for their ideas because copyright law does not protect basic factual information.²⁰

The first time the U.S. Supreme Court fully explained the idea-expression dichotomy was in the case of Baker v. Selden, where the idea of a bookkeeping method was not deemed protectable by copyright; however, the description of the system was granted copyright protection.²¹ The Court reasoned that the only time exclusive rights in an “useful art” can be provided is by the patent process, because the monopoly on ideas would be counter to the purposes of the Copyright Clause.²²

And, in Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., the Court continued to flesh out the idea-expression divide, this time focusing on the conflict between the Copyright Clause and the First Amendment. In finding for the plaintiff, the Court preserved former-president Gerald Ford’s copyright protection in his memoirs, which were largely based on factual events during his presidency. “Copyright’s idea/expression dichotomy ‘strike[s] a definitional balance between the First Amendment and the Copyright Act by permitting free communication of facts while still protecting an author’s expression.’”²³

However, the Court has also recognized that there are some ideas that can only be expressed in a limited number of ways. This is referred to as the merger doctrine, and in these cases the Court will often only recognize infringement if the advertisement is substantially similar to the copyrighted work.²⁴ Or, instead of an affirmative defense, the Court will consider the merger doctrine in determining if the original work qualified for copyright protection in the first place.

One of the factors the Court might consider in a case involving the merger doctrine is whether the idea expressed is merely scène à faire—translated from French for “scene that must be done”, or something that is a ostensibly a standard requirement for a genre.²⁵ In a recent advertising copyright case, the 9^th Circuit determined that a vodka company did not infringe upon a photographer’s previous work for the company because a photograph of a vodka bottle is scène à faire for the industry.²⁶ The defendant would have had to make an advertisement that was “virtually identical” in order to have violated the photographer’s copyright. Applying this analysis to political advertising could help a campaign determine some boundaries of what elements of their work might be protectable.

II. Political Ads and Infringement

a. Only Creative Elements Receive Protection

As applied to the context of political advertising, the idea-expression dichotomy requires a rather complicated analysis. It is difficult to dissect and extract the core creativity contained in political advertising and neatly categorize the elements into the silos of “idea” or “expression”. In the absence of a commercial good or service at the core of their message, presidential candidates are seeking to be elected. Sometimes they do so using basic factual information—the details of their tax plans, for example. Other times they might use short phrases and words as slogans—hope, safe, change, truth, etc.

The scène à faire for the political advertising industry is not quite as difficult to define. Red, white, and blue hues with “Vote for ___” prominently displayed on a poster or bumper sticker with a candidate’s name and slogan is the stereotypical example. Furthermore, many voters can recognize a negative attack advertisement the moment they hear an ominous chord during election season, which would suggest to the Courts that such elements are “standard” in the “treatment” of campaign ads.²⁷

In Section I (b) of this memorandum, we took a brief survey of some of the design work presented by the presidential candidates from the 2008 election. A closer look reveals that some of the elements of the presidential logos are likely not protectable by copyright.

For example, the typographic elements, though conscious choices to express a message, were merely a tool used to convey information. In Eltra Corp. v. Ringer, one of the most prominent modern typography cases, the Court considered whether typography is protectable.²⁸ There, the court determined that typeface is generally “an industrial design in which the design cannot exist independently and separately as a work of art.”²⁹ Accordingly, one can assume that the type-based elements of logos will not receive copyright protection.

Nevertheless, some organizations, such as Typeright which has a mission objective to “promote typefaces as creative works and to advocate their legal protection as intellectual property”³⁰ have argued that an application of the “filter test” from Computer Associates International, Inc. v. Altai, Inc. should protect innovations in typeface.³¹ However, when making such an argument, the court will likely find that the efficiency concerns of conveying information via typeface are so restrained and that there are limited “workable options”³², and because of the merger doctrine the typeface innovation fails to overcome the second step of the Altai test regarding filtration.

Focusing solely on the typographic construction of words in political construction would be shortsighted in an analysis of political advertising. In addition, one should also look at the slogans that similarly have a large impact on the audience. Typically, these short and catchy phrases will not be granted copyright protection. In fact, the United States Copyright Office has distributed a circular clearing up any confusion on this matter with the succinctly titled “Copyright Protection Not Available for Names, Titles, or Short Phrases.”³³ In the presidential election, one could come to the conclusion that Barack Obama and John McCain would be unable able to secure copyright protection on the use of their names or even their slogans.³⁴

Finally, an analysis of the images and videos produced by the campaigns raises even more issues with respect to the idea-expression dichotomy. Although these candidates are extremely newsworthy,³⁵ the campaigns would not be seeking copyright protection on the “news” but rather on the videos and images produced by their campaigns. These videos and images have been found sufficiently original to receive copyright protection under “the prevailing view” of Judge Learned Hand:

[almost] any… photograph may claim the necessary originality to support a copyright merely by virtue of the photographers’ personal choice of subject matter, angle of photograph, lighting and determination of the precise time when the photograph is to be taken.³⁶

Because of the inherent originality afforded to the photographic process, campaigns can assert a fairly large copyright privilege on their images and videos. However, as we will analyze in Section II (c), the affirmative defense of fair use might not give the campaign the power to absolutely prevent infringement.

b. Instances of Potential Infringement in 2008 Presidential Election

During the summer of the hotly contested 2008 presidential election, the McCain campaign launched a new homepage that featured a new slogan and new graphics. To some, however, the homepage seemed quite familiar as one political analyst put it bluntly, titling his news report “McCain Rips Off Obama’s Slogan And Logo.”³⁷ McCain’s new slogan was “A Leader You Can Believe In”, which most would recognize as substantially similar to Obama’s established slogan “Change You Can Believe In.”³⁸ Furthermore, the graphics of McCain’s new homepage consisted of a red and white striped landscape and a starburst blue horizon, which was also strikingly similar to Obama’s webpage and a stark departure from McCain’s preceding web presence that featured dark black with gold stars.³⁹

Similarly, shortly following the completion of the 2008 election, Benjamin Netanyahu, a popular Israeli candidate running for prime minister launched a website that is nearly identical to Obama’s. Questioned by the New York Times about the mimicry, one of Netanyahu’s top campaign advisors simply replied, “Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.”⁴⁰ He continued:

We’re all in the same business, so we took a close look at a guy who has been the most successful and tried to learn from him. And while we will not use the word ‘change’ in the same way in our campaign, we believe Netanyahu is the real candidate of change for Israel.⁴¹

A spokesperson from the design firm in charge of Obama’s website, Blue State Digital, was not surprised, stating that the campaign’s success meant that “people are going to knock things off, both in terms of functionality and aesthetic.”⁴²

c. Fair Use as a Defense to Infringement in Politics

Copyright protection is not absolutely enforceable and “fair use” is sometimes considered an acceptable affirmative defense to limit the exclusive rights of copyright holders. As provided in 17 U.S.C. § 107, the fair use defense should be assessed by applying four guiding factors:⁴³

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

This multi-factored analysis requires a fact-based inquiry, which means it is very difficult to have any certainty in the outcome of an asserted fair use defense.⁴⁴ In order to gain a fuller understanding of each of these elements in regards to political advertising, it would be helpful to consider their application in the context of an election.

i. Purpose and Character

In the world of political advertising, this particular aspect of fair use creates tension between the desire to promote innovative design and the need for comparative analysis.⁴⁵ Copyright protection has not been construed to allow a copyright owner to squelch another’s opinion of the work as that would tend to conflict with the stated goal of copyright law.⁴⁶ In commercial usage, if the purpose of an infringing use is comparative advertising, this factor will go in favor of a defendant.⁴⁷

In a case related to our political advertising focus, during the 2000 election, presidential candidate Ralph Nader was sued by MasterCard for making a parody of the “Priceless” ad campaign.⁴⁸ The court held that Nader’s ad parody was sufficiently transformative as it was “a political non-commercial purpose”.⁴⁹ It follows that in the context of a political campaign, the court views such use even more in favor of an infringer using a logo as a shorthand reference, because such a “transformative” use would advance the public exchange of new ideas.⁵⁰ However, it should be noted that Nader’s usage was different and transformative from MasterCard’s commercial, whereas a court could potentially find that a political ad that heavily mimics another political ad without new ideas might not be considered sufficiently transformative.⁵¹

One should also factor in the court’s finding in Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Moral Majority, Inc. where Hustler magazine had made a parody advertisement of Jerry Falwell alleging the religious leader engaged in lascivious activities prior to his sermons.⁵² This advertisement was then distributed by Falwell to fundraise for his political lobbying group.⁵³ The Ninth Circuit ruled that the fair use factors favored Jerry Falwell’s organization’s use of Hustler’s copyright work, even though they distributed full exact copies.⁵⁴

It follows that the courts have been relatively liberal in allowing fair use in the borrowing of an original work in order to successfully mock it.⁵⁵ The concept of parody falls under this category of fair use analysis because it functions as a commentary on the work being mocked.⁵⁶ However, if one is using the work as a vehicle for commentary on something unrelated, the court may consider this satire and fail to approve a fair use defense.⁵⁷ Nevertheless, if the court does find a work to be a parody under the first factor, the remaining three will be unlikely to stop the court from finding it an acceptable fair use defense.⁵⁸

During July of the 2008 election, the Republican National Committee launched the “BarackBook” Web site, a parody of the popular social networking Web site Facebook.⁵⁹ By showing Barack Obama’s “connections” with various political figures and other infamous individuals, the RNC generated a significant amount of web traffic and media coverage.⁶⁰ Because of the aforementioned precedent decisions, the Republican National Committee could be fairly confident that their “BarackBook” Web site would be successful in asserting a fair use defense because it mocked the social networking aspects of Facebook with Obama’s own web of contacts.⁶¹

ii. Nature of Copyrighted Work

With the second factor of fair use analysis, we focus on the “nature of the copyrighted work.”⁶² Typically, courts will see this factor of the fair use analysis as in favor of an infringer when the subject of the copyright is disseminating factual information as opposed to “fiction or fantasy.”⁶³ In Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, J. O’Connor heavily cites an article by Robert A. Gorman titled “Fact or Fancy? The Implications for Copyright”:

[Even] within the field of fact works, there are gradations as to the relative proportion of fact and fancy. One may move from sparsely embellished maps and directories to elegantly written biography. The extent to which one must permit expressive language to be copied, in order to assure dissemination of the underlying facts, will thus vary from case to case.⁶⁴

In quoting this passage, the court was distinguishing a journalist’s need to copy key quotes and “isolated phrases” to get to the core of newsworthy material versus the wholesale copying of entire passages and expressions of an author.⁶⁵

As applied to the context of a political campaign, the second factor would be dependent upon the subject of the asserted fair use defense. For example, we can deduce from Harper & Row that Barack Obama and John McCain would enjoy similar copyright protection in their respective best-selling autobiographies that Gerald Ford did in his book “A Time to Heal”.⁶⁶

A more interesting application of the second factor of fair use analysis might be whether a competitor could appropriate one of the candidate’s highly successful fundraising emails. In fact, in a somewhat related recent case, a car-dealership’s 54-word “thank you” note was seen as protectable against a competitor’s infringement in CRA Mktg., Inc. v. Brandow’s Fairway Chrysler-Plymouth-Jeep-Eagle, Inc.⁶⁷ Although the campaigns are highly factual in nature, it is undeniable that elements of the political advertising market are commercial and accordingly the court will likely recognize that these works are close to the “core” of intended copyright protection.⁶⁸

iii. Amount and Substantiality of Portion Used

The third factor considers the amount and substantiality of the portion used in the copyright infringement. In the case of Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp., J. Learned Hand in finding against an infringer said, “no plagiarist can excuse the wrong by showing how much of his work he did not pirate.”⁶⁹ Though the courts have considered the percentage of a copyright infringement versus the copyrighted work as a whole, this test does not necessarily go in the infringer’s favor; but, instead, the court looks as to whether the excerpts play a “key role” in the infringing works.⁷⁰ This factor is highly dependent on individual instances and analysis in the political context would be more effective to focus on the other fair use analysis.

iv. Effect of Use Upon Potential Market or Value of Work

Finally, the fourth factor focuses on “the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.” This final factor is usually considered the single most import element of fair use.⁷¹ In order to negate fair use, a copyright holder will only need to show that if the infringer’s use “should become widespread, it would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work.’⁷²

In the case of political advertising in the context of a presidential election, it is important to identify the copyright holder in order to determine the relevant market. At first glance, one might think that the candidates are the only copyright holders; however, the political advertising world is a fairly complex industry. In some instances, the candidates might be the market and a design firm, such as Sol Sender’s, might be the copyright holder selling their work. Or, in the 2008 election, one could consider the work of artist Shepherd Fairey, who sold his iconic posters through an online marketplace on Barack Obama’s website in order to raise money for his preferred candidate. In all these instances, there is a complicated commercial market intertwined within the political context of fundraising and electioneering, and some infringers argue that their First Amendment right to use protected materials should trump the copyright holders. Nevertheless, the court, as it did in Harper & Row, will likely reject the theory that First Amendment values require a different rule that would “expand fair use to effectively destroy any expectation of copyright protection in the work of a public figure.”⁷³

In an interesting twist, both candidates during the 2008 election made an extensive effort to negotiate a solution to some copyright issues that emerged during the campaign. The televised presidential debates were the copyright property of some of the leading networks, and because of this they are protective of their broadcast rights. The candidates, recognizing the importance of wide dissemination of their ideas and the fact that many supporters want to remix these broadcasts to post them on the Internet, asked the broadcasts to consider adopting a creative commons solution for “Open Debates.” In a letter addressed to the networks, Barack Obama wrote:

I urge both the Commission on Presidential Debates and the television networks to take action to free the content the Presidential debates produce and to engage voters more directly in the questions asked during debates. Technology and the Internet continue to play a revolutionary role in this campaign.⁷⁴

Obama was joined in this proposal by John McCain, who had particularly bad luck with respect to copyright and the distribution of video on the Internet. Several of McCain’s ads were taken down off of YouTube during the campaign because of DMCA takedown requests (possibly from the use of snippets of networks news coverage). Trevor Potter, General Counsel for McCain’s campaign wrote a letter to YouTube officials:

Despite the complete lack of merit in these copyright claims, YouTube has removed our videos immediately upon receipt of takedown notices. This is both unfortunate and unnecessary. It is unfortunate because it deprives the public of the ability to freely and easily view and discuss the most popular political videos of the day. And it is wholly unnecessary from a legal standpoint.⁷⁵

The letter heavily cites Keep Thomson Governor Committee v. Citizens for For Gallen Committee, in which the court declined to enjoin an allegedly infringing political advertisement that featured music that had been licensed by the candidate.⁷⁶ YouTube rebuffed McCain’s request and encouraged the Senator to enhance the complicated fair use doctrine and revise the abusive DMCA provision on Capitol Hill,⁷⁷ thereby underscoring the difficulties in protecting copyright in the new digital paradigm.⁷⁸

III. Conclusion

In a political campaign, copyright protection analysis is extremely complicated because the message and ideas of a candidate become so intertwined with the expression and therefore parties are inclined to use potentially copyrighted material as a cognitive shortcut in discourse. The likely outcome in this situation, as we have seen, would be a favorable result for the defendant as copyright doctrine denies protection for expressive copyright materials when “idea and expression merge so that the free use of the former requires the free use of the latter.”⁷⁹

Nevertheless, it’s important to point out that the asserted copyright protection that a candidate expresses in such a situation is not, at its core, economic; but rather it is a political objection rooted more comfortably in the trademark regime.⁸⁰ Consequently, if a politician is merely trying to do damage control on the discourse surrounding his ideas when a party makes an unauthorized use of a logo, the asserted protection does not appear to exist in either trademark or copyright law.

Economically, it makes more sense for a campaign to control their image not through oppressive copyright restrictions, but to maximize quality distribution to effectively deliver their message. Perhaps this election was a referendum on innovation at its most basic— the voters sought new ideas, and the candidate who was best able to express a message of change was ultimately the victor.

* Footnotes available upon request. If you’d like to publish in something more scholarly than this blog, let me know.

** Here’s a great piece on campaign speech and copyright claims (PDF) by the Center for Democracy & Technology.

Major League Ballparks Visited

Sun, 15 May 2011 21:35:19 -0400

My first major league baseball game was in 1987 in NYC to see my beloved Yankees. I’ve loved going to games ever since so I thought I’d put together a list of ballparks I’ve visited.

The stadiums and teams have changed over the years, but it’d be nice to eventually be able to say I’ve seen each franchise play at home at some point. I’m not necessarily trying to complete a collection here, but each unique visit brings its own sights, smells, sounds and memories.

A list of ballparks I’ve visited (last updated 5/15/11):

Old Yankee Stadium (NY Yankees)
New Yankee Stadium (NY Yankees)
Shea Stadium (NY Mets)
Fenway Park (Boston Red Sox)
Olympic Stadium (Montreal Expos)
RFK Stadium (Washington Nationals)
Nationals Park (Washington Nationals)
Rogers Centre (Toronto Blue Jays)
Memorial Stadium (Baltimore Orioles)
Camden Yards (Baltimore Orioles)
Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium (Atlanta Braves)
U.S. Cellular Field (Chicago White Sox)
Wrigley Field (Chicago Cubs)
Progressive Field (Cleveland Indians)
Metrodome (Minnesota Twins)
Miller Park (Milwaukee Brewers)
AT&T Park (San Francisco Giants)
Oakland Coliseum (Oakland Athletics)

Complete list of MLB stadiums on Wikipedia.

ATX

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 02:34:00 -0400

About a month ago I had an idea for a feature that I wanted a travel website to implement. So I wrote them.

Hi Kayak,

I love you.

I also love my long-distance girlfriend, which is why I’m writing you with the following feature request.

Cheapest way for person from city A to see person from city B. Sometimes the result will be person traveling from A to B. Other times it will be B to A. Finally, there’s the exciting option of city C (wherein both people travel).

For context, my lovely lady lives in Cleveland and I live in San Francisco. If it’s overall cheaper for us to meet in Vegas, that’d be nice to know.

Keep up the good work.

Love,
Mark

They wrote back the next day.

Hi Mark,

What a great request (and if I may say so, it sounds like your girlfriend is a lucky woman).

Have you experimented with our custom airports search? You can specify both CLE and SFO as the To airport and LAS, say, as the From:

http://www.kayak.com/flights/CLE,SFO,nearby-LAS,nearby/2011-04-08/2011-04-10

Or …

Have you played around with our Explore or Buzz features?

http://www.kayak.com/explore
http://www.kayak.com/buzz

I wish you the very best in your travel planning!

Kind regards and happy travels,
Kristin

That’s some amazing customer service correspondence right there. Kayak, give Kristin a raise.

I’d still love it if they implemented my idea. But, in the mean time, I did some serious custom search exploring and found out that a long weekend in Austin, Texas was pretty affordable and looked like a great time.

Just got back from that trip to Austin and had a blast. BBQ, Barton Springs, lounging at Hotel San Jose— it was a perfect weekend vacation.

"Mark Pike: I don’t remember how I stumbled on Free Darko back in 2005, but I’ve devoured..."

Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:37:00 -0400

“Mark Pike: I don’t remember how I stumbled on Free Darko back in 2005, but I’ve devoured every post since then. As a fan of the League who grew up in an NBA geographical no-man’s land, the tenets of Liberated Fandom really resonated with me. The Free Darko collective has done an expert job aestheticizing the game without turning it into a grad school paper, finding beauty outside box scores and writing narrative arcs between X’s and O’s. It’s so hard to say goodbye, but I’m just happy this place ever existed.”

- freedarko.com

Goodbye, Free Darko. Long live, Free Darko.

"When I came to William & Mary, I knew I wanted to focus on learning about technology issues. I..."

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:22:54 -0500

“When I came to William & Mary, I knew I wanted to focus on learning about technology issues. I had the opportunity to take classes on copyright litigation, European internet law, privacy, and much more. My classroom experiences helped me land quality internships in the field. I’m thrilled that William & Mary gave me the opportunity to go from studying in Colonial Williamsburg to working in Silicon Valley.”

- W&M Law School - Student Profile

Nice write-up on my old law school’s admission site!

Random Rules

Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:57:00 -0500

Random Rules:

I wrote a guest post for my favorite basketball blog, Free Darko, about the NBA’s new technical foul policy and legal philosophy. Check it out here.

During a particularly inspired round of SSRN browsing for search terms wholly unrelated, I stumbled across an article titled “Legal Formalism, Institutional Norms, and the Morality of Basketball”, which pretty much made me want to give Learned Hand a courtside high-five.

The article revolves around the Suns vs. Spurs 2007 playoffs suspensions and is clearly colored by the author’s frustrations as an NBA fan and legal scholar. Though the article is a few years old, I think it’s a great platform to explore the recent Technical Foul rule change and how the new approach appears to be similarly flawed to those of us who are legal realists, and fans of a League of personalities.

Context. I saw the Levi’s Store and thought I should pop...

Wed, 01 Dec 2010 22:21:00 -0500

Context.

I saw the Levi’s Store and thought I should pop in and get some jeans because I’ve been looking dorky lately. Was about to settle on some relaxed but rugged 559’s when I looked up and saw a familiar face. I thought to myself, “Is that two-time NBA MVP, Steve Nash? Nah, he’s too short. Wait, that totally is Stevesie!”

It definitely was Steve Nash.

A bit starstruck and not wanting to blow up his spot, I contemplated not saying anything to him. But nobody was really paying attention and I’m a huge fan and he seems like a chill guy so I thought I’d introduce myself, politely and discretely.

Steve Nash is an extremely awesome dude.

“Steve? Hi, my name is Mark and I’m a big fan.” He was appreciative and cool and shook my hand. “I heard a rumor you were thinking about coming in to the Facebook office this week? I work there…” He said he meant to swing by this road trip but couldn’t make it this time but wants to grow his fan base on Facebook and mentioned how he thinks Facebook is great for keeping in touch with fans. ”Awesome!”

Steve Nash has heard of Free Darko.

“I actually write guest posts from time to time on a basketball blog called Free Darko. You heard of it before?” Steve Nash grinned and said he knows Free Darko. I mentioned I have a post dropping soon about the 2007 Suns / Spurs playoff suspensions and legal formalism and technical foul policy and he sort of nodded and seemed interested and generally cool.

Steve Nash took a picture of us.

I asked for a picture like a fanboy. Nash snapped the shot with a one-armed self-portrait assist. He even insisted on taking two because he’s a perfectionist.

Steve Nash is my new best friend.

Career Questions

Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:38:17 -0500

I recently received a few emails from students at my law school alma mater who were looking for career advice. I thought I’d go ahead and post one of my replies publicly in case anybody else was interested in it. I know I would have appreciated the opportunity to read about somebody else’s input during the grueling job search process. Hopefully this helps, and please feel free to get in touch if you’re interested in any of the work I’ve done.

Do you actually have a web/tech background?

Prior to law school, I wouldn’t say that I had a technology background in the computer science / coding sense. Throughout college, I was pretty fascinated by the web as a medium for sharing information. Napster was in its prime during my freshman year and I signed up for Facebook during my last week of classes. I dabbled in some HTML in between (and ever since). As this was happening, I was studying at Duke’s Public Policy school and became interested in technology from a policy perspective.

More generally, was there anything specific in your background (or a combination of factors) that you emphasized when you applied for the EPIC internship?

I emphasized that nearly every job I had after graduating from college had something to do with technology, policy, and the intersection of the two. While at the Center for American Progress, I worked in online communications and helped out with a lecture series on topics like net neutrality, creative commons, and the wealth of networks. Whether working with an innovative digital music distribution service, campaigning for a national election, or interning for a non-profit devoted to empowering technology, all of my employment experiences made me confident that I could research and write about everything from consumer privacy lawsuits, e-voting fraud, and the digital divide.

Based on the work you’ve done for each organization, how did your summer with EPIC compare?

My summer at EPIC (an EPIC summer) gave me the opportunity to work on a bunch of different issues. Each week the IPIOP fellows were given new and engaging assignments and we got to explore a lot of different subjects. As a watchdog group, a lot of what we did was staying up to date and reacting to new policy issues. It’s fast-paced, fun, and you feel like your contribution makes a difference both internally for the organization and for the larger cause.

My summer associate job was a great opportunity to learn about private practice. I researched case law and wrote memoranda on a variety of legal matters including technology, corporate, real estate, and contracts. I never knew what I’d be working on next, and that was exciting. But, the work itself was fairly traditional and I was more interested in working on cutting edge technology issues and bigger picture policy work— things that my current position provides.

My fellowship at DHS helped me get a feel for how larger government agencies operate. It felt very stable, but very slow moving. It was difficult to quantify the impact I was making in such a large organization and that can be disorienting. But, in reality, the work you do in these types of agencies do make a large impact. I was working in the procurement office, and I learned a lot about legislation and regulations that deal with competition issues.

Lastly, I’m curious about the kind of work you do now for Facebook. Your job title (Platform Operations, Specialist) sounds more like a tech position than a legal position. Is that correct, or are you involved with the legal side of the company?

My current position does not require extensive coding knowledge, but it does require some level of literacy in order to talk about the issues. A large part of my daily job is to communicate policies to the developer community in order to ensure the best possible Platform user experience. I work cross-functionally with a number of teams at Facebook, including the Legal group to discuss issues like privacy and intellectual property. I’m not of counsel, but I do use skills learned in law school regularly to provide analysis. I love my job and I’m excited by the work we do at Facebook.

Every now and then, there’s 3 seconds of television that...

Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:36:00 -0400

Every now and then, there’s 3 seconds of television that are just so perfectly suited to be viewed like a flipbook or cartoon strip. Last night’s Mad Men episode, where Peggy pokes her head up to spy on the commotion in Don Draper’s office, was exactly such a moment.

So I spent my lunch break learning how to create an animated gif.

Click on the picture to see it in motion.

Landon Donovan inspired me to make a “Write the...

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:47:00 -0400

Landon Donovan inspired me to make a “Write the Future” remix. USA USA USA!!!

Pass it on: http://youtu.be/F6uEgZd94tA

Pictured from Left to Right: Mikhail Prokhorov, Michael...

Sun, 23 May 2010 20:18:50 -0400

Pictured from Left to Right: Mikhail Prokhorov, Michael Bloomberg, Jay-Z

Q: What do a Russian oligarch billionaire, the mayor of New York City, and the best rapper alive have in common?

A: Breakfast.

There needs to be an oil painting of this up at the MoMA, or at least in my living room.

Not pictured is real estate developer Bruce Ratner, who also broke bread and discussed the Nets with Bloomberg. The team’s big move to Brooklyn, the NBA’s shift to accepting a global economy, eminent domain, and the courtship of Lebron James all make me feel like writing an update to my post at Free Darko last year on basketball and architecture.

"Courts across the country have been unclear about what privacy rights apply to e-mail and texting,..."

Wed, 28 Apr 2010 02:13:00 -0400

“Courts across the country have been unclear about what privacy rights apply to e-mail and texting, which are fast eclipsing postal mail and conventional telephones. The Supreme Court should make clear that the Fourth Amendment’s robust privacy protections apply just as robustly to 21st-century communication.”

- The Supreme Court, Texting and Privacy - NYT

I was particularly interested in the oral arguments for Ontario v. Quon, not just to see how the Court applies search standards to the fact pattern, but also to see how the Court would handle the technology focused discussion.

After the Court heard arguments, there was a lot of press about how Chief Justice Roberts was a disconnected Luddite (“Maybe — maybe everybody else knows this, but what is the difference between the pager and the e-mail?”), but after reading the transcript, I found myself agreeing with this piece in The Weekly Standard that shows Roberts was just clarifying things for the record.

Many privacy advocates have been pushing the Court in Quon to adopt data minimization practices in order to ensure workplace privacy, even for government employees. Reading the transcript, it does not look like the Court will recognize such a right.

Now, with the iPhone lost & found, search & seizure case, it looks like legal interpretations of electronic privacy and reasonable search procedure is in the news again.

It leaves me wondering— in the future, will we always think Justices are old-fashioned and don’t understand technology? If the next generation of Justices grow up in the era of social networking, will they be more likely to recognize privacy rights, or will they just believe that everything should be transparent and public?

I Love Zipcar

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 16:04:00 -0400

This is my whole-hearted endorsement of Zipcar.

For reals, click here and get $25 free driving right now and thank me later.

Since graduating from school, I’ve been living in metropolitan areas where owning a car and trying to park was simply not worth the time, money, and energy. Plus, public transportation options in Washington, DC and San Francisco, CA were so readily available that keeping up with a vehicle just didn’t make sense.

However, each month there seem to be enough random errands, road trips, etc. that having access to a car was still really important. I didn’t want to be the guy that always bums keys from his friends (thanks, guys!), so I looked into other options.

I walked by Zipcar parking spaces all the time in DC so I knew that it might be a convenient option, but I had no idea just how easy the system was until I signed up at the beginning of the year.

In fact, the first time I used Zipcar was on the way back from a vacation when I realized we accidentally booked a return ticket to a different airport than the one where my girlfriend left her car. The cost of a taxi up to BWI from DCA was quoted at more than $80. Renting a Zipcar for 2 hours? Less than $20. We reserved it the same day, didn’t have to deal with the hassle of rental car company paperwork, and the car was sitting there waiting for us to wave the magic membership card on the windshield.

Sure, there are some drawbacks.

Right now you have to return the car from the same spot you rented it from, so you can’t drive one-way home from IKEA with a trunkful of Ektorp sofas and several dozen swedish meatballs. The likely issue with this is that the registration system is not advanced enough to compute “smart reservations” wherein you leave a car somewhere and then another Zipcar user picks it up and takes it back to its permanent parking space (much less a completely distributed network that does not rely on permanent spaces). Bike-sharing programs have dealt with this “free-rider” issue of people using the bikes to only zoom downhill by offering cheap rides and free credits for those who take bikes back to their uphill parking locations.

Another minor frustration is that many Zipcar users are infrequent drivers and therefore get lost much more frequently than regular drivers who are more familiar with the road system. This leads to late returns, which can have a domino effect and really screw up your schedule. For example, I rented a truck for one hour in San Francisco to pick up a new bed-frame. The person who had the truck before me was 30 minutes late, which only left me 30 minutes to complete my errand. Zipcar penalizes you $50 per hour if you’re late, so this prevents a lot of abuse in the system— but it happens.

They leave a fuel card in the car, so you can always fill up for free and you’re supposed to leave the tank at least 1/4 full (I always leave it 3/4 full!). They even give you a credit of one free hour if you take the car through a car-wash!

The best Zipcar feature, by far, is the mobile phone application.

While you’re on the go, you can search for close-by available Zipcars using an incredible map overlay. There’s over 20 cars within a half-mile of my apartment— everything from Beamers to Tacomas to Priuses. You can rent for as cheap as $7/hr. You can make your reservation via the mobile app on your smartphone and even— this blows my mind— unlock the car using your phone! The keys are always left in the vehicle and you have to swipe in at the beginning of your reservation with your membership card to identify yourself. One time, I accidentally left my wallet with the membership card locked in the car and didn’t think I’d be able to unlock the vehicle. But then I remembered the amazing mobile phone application that sends a signal to outer space and UNLOCKS the vehicle! Awesome.

As the network economy evolves and data-sharing via social apps is widely adopted, I think the co-ownership model will be incredibly convenient for many of us. Right now, you can count me as a happy customer.

If you want to join Zipcar today, check out this referral code that hooks you up with $25 free driving (and I get $25 too!). It’s only $50 per year, and there’s a one-time $25 application fee.

Join Zipcar and get $25 in free driving!

As you can tell, I think it’s totally worth it. I look forward to sharing a car with you soon!

Saving daylight in San Francisco. The morning began when I...

Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:41:00 -0400

Saving daylight in San Francisco.

The morning began when I subconsciously forgot to “spring forward” the clock in a failed attempt to make my girlfriend miss her cross-country flight home. WH:00 PST

"It's All a Game"

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:50:27 -0500

I’m finishing up one of my first weeks at work and thought I’d watch a video a few people have been passing around the office on “Why It’s All a Game.”

It’s a fantastic and lively presentation by Jesse Schell, a game designer and professor at the Entertainment Technology Center at Carnegie Mellon University. He discusses economic incentives and small psychological tricks that are currently utilized in fantasy games and how we can harness them to similar effect in reality (for example, “Tattoogle AdSense!”).

Earlier this week, CNN posted an article called “The Facebook games that millions love (and hate)” which highlights some of the current crop of games that latch onto somebody’s reality-based social network within the fantasy realm.

A lot of these games seem exceptionally silly, but Schell’s presentation details how we can replicate these meaningless fantasy realms to solve a lot of real world problems. And, in doing so, it makes me feel confident that reviewing policy compliance for fake mafia games is a worthy contribution to society at large.

On the Move

Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:59:00 -0500

When I wrote my law school application essays several years ago, I talked about my interest in technology policy and where I wanted to be when I graduated. I just took a another quick look at my application again and it surprised me.

First, I’m lucky the admissions committee let me into school with the cheesy, sophomoric, idealistic essay I sent them.

“… I once read an article in Wired magazine about telecommunications firms that were buying railroad routes and installing fiber optic cable, and how they were using archaic laws from the Wild West to solve new legal issues. This was probably the tipping point, the moment I realized I want a legal background. The parallels in American history became apparent: the San Francisco gold rushes, the dot-com bubble bursts, the Pacific railroads, and the Silicon Valleys. There’s a new high-tech frontier, and I want to be a part of it.”

It’s funny how things work out.

Tomorrow morning I start a new job at Facebook in Palo Alto, CA.

I’ll be joining the staff on the Platform Operations team where I’ll participate in policy discussions and help identify ways developers can make applications that will give users the best possible experience.

I’m really excited about this new opportunity and I look forward to working with so many talented people. The ‘app economy’ is just getting started and it’ll be an amazing learning experience to be in the middle of things.

Oh, just checking out the Traffic Cams, and stumbled across an...

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:43:00 -0500

Oh, just checking out the Traffic Cams, and stumbled across an accident happening on I-64. I guess that answers my question about whether the roads are clear.