At LONG last, after working on issues ranging from transparency in international trade and hydraulic fracturing to making sure that 3Ls have grades upon which to base their graduation, I am now going to begin a flurry of posts of this quarter’s shows. Thanks for your patience, and get ready for a barrage!
So let’s start with Show #208, April 8, my interview with four-time guest (thanks Mark!) Prof. Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School on this term’s United States Supreme Court intellectual property cases — and there are a banner number. This term’s cases have addressed some of the most vexing issues in patent law generally, ranging from claim construction to abstract ideas. We discussed the primary cases, as well as current legislative efforts to address patent trolls/non-practicing entities/patent assertion entities. As always, I greatly enjoyed my discussion with Mark.
I am pleased to post two new shows. The first, Show #88, May 27, is my interview with Prof. Gary Small of UCLA, co-author of iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind. Gary and his co-author Gigi Vorgan have written a fascinating account of the current research into the impact on the human brain caused by technology, particularly the Internet. The book is a very readable study of the research, as well as an optimistic assessment of where we are headed. Gary and I discuss much of the research, as well as his outlook on our likelihood of survival of the information onslaught. I hope that you enjoy the interview!
My second interview, Show #89, June 3 is with Profs. Dan Burk of U.C. Irvine School of Law and Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School, co-authors of The Patent Crisis and How the Courts Can Solve It. Dan and Mark (who is the first three-time repeat guest on Hearsay Culture) take an extended look at the state of empirical research into the basic question of whether the patent “system” (if such a system exists) is working. They take a middle ground between previous Hearsay Culture guests in ultimately suggesting (as the subtitle of the book states) that the courts currently have the “policy levers” to solve the most vexing problems with patent law. Dan and Mark are two of the leading intellectual property law scholars in the United States, and I very much enjoyed discussing their book with them.
Bobbi and I focused on copyright, and particularly her forthcoming book on moral rights and personhood in copyright. A timely topic, given all that is currently happening in litigating fair use issues.
Mark and I focused on patents, and what best can be called an update from last year’s interview, and the discussion ranged from In re Bilski to what’s down the road for patent reform.
I enjoyed both interviews and hope that you do also!
Show #29, my interview with Prof. Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School is posted. Thanks again to Mark for taking time out of a very busy schedule to be on the show.
The timing of the show is great, given the flood of patent cases in the Supreme Court. As the show was aired on Wednesday, February 21, the day that Microsoft v. AT&T was argued, Mark offered his first-impression thoughts on the case based upon the summary of the argument found on the PatentlyO blog.
Patent law is (or should be) a concern to all interested in how technology is created, commercialized and disseminated. The incentive-based innovation system that United States intellectual property law conceives is built, in large measure, around the dual roles of copyright and patent. Trademark and trade secret law (the latter near-and-dear to my research) take second place (starting from a constitutional perspective). While I would challenge the assertion that trade secrecy deserves such a designation, simply by virtue that it is primarily a beast of state law, it gets less national attention (although trade secret litigation is a booming business).
So I’ve embarked upon a pitch to be concerned about where patent law is headed, although perhaps none is needed. Mark is an expert (and prolific writer) in this area; hence the focus. Enjoy!
Playlist for Show #29 (the challenge of finding patent music referred me somehow to jazz, a personal love — I will try to figure out an explanation):
I am thrilled to post shows #100 and 101! After over three years of shows, a few thank yous are appropriate. While I get into an Oscar-type thank you speech on show #100, I thank my friends at KZSU-FM (especially Mark Lawrence and Kathryn Todd, as well as numerous DJs) and Stanford Law School (especially former Center for Internet and Society colleagues Lauren Gelman, Jennifer Granick and Larry Lessig, as well as Mark Lemley and Joe Neto) for their early, continuing and ongoing support! Of course, the show would not be what it is without great guests, and I thank all 101! Lastly, thanks much to my wonderful wife Heidi, who has been my staunchest supporter and friend, and without whom I would be far the poorer.
Show #100, October 28 is my interview with William Patry, Esq., Senior Copyright Counsel at Google, author of Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars. Bill has written a thorough and descriptive overview of the state of the battle over the contours of copyright. In the interview, we discuss his personal interactions with Jack Valenti, as well as his critique of the nature of language in the efforts to frame the issues from all sides. While we do not discuss the status of the book search settlement negotiations, we cover plenty of fertile ground and I greatly enjoyed his insights and our discussion (hopefully Bill will come back on after the settlement is complete!)
Show #101, November 4 is my interview with repeat guest Larry Downes, author of The Laws of Disruption. Larry’s book, written for a broad audience, shows how technology has outpaced law in a variety of areas. We discuss a wide range of topics in furtherance of understanding how we might react to various changes in technology and society. Larry’s book is eminently readable and I greatly enjoyed the show and discussion!
Stay tuned for Show #29, my interview with Prof. Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School, to be posted early this week. Also, on Monday and Tuesday, February 26 and 27, I’ll be at the Tech Policy Summit in San Jose, California, for anyone who’d like to say hello! Hope to see you there!
Long time listeners (that is, those who have listened to Hearsay Culture for over four months) know that schedule changes do occur. More often than not, it is because of my work/personal responsibilities, but on occasion it is for better reasons. The below is such a change.
Prof. Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago Law School just happens to be down the street from the law school at the Hoover Institution. So, I am fortunate to have the opportunity to interview Richard in-studio, which I will do this week. Thus, the schedule change.
Additionally, the show is now scheduled through May thanks to a great addition: Brad Stone of The New York Times and return guest Jennifer Granick will be on the show in May to discuss the state of technology. It promises to be a lively discussion.