Intellectual Property and First Amendment Law Lexicon

0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/84

flashcard set

Earn XP

Description and Tags

Flashcards covering key legal terms, tests, and judicial cases related to Copyright, Trademark, the First Amendment, and Media Law based on the lecture notes.

Last updated 1:58 AM on 5/5/26
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai

No analytics yet

Send a link to your students to track their progress

85 Terms

1
New cards

Common Law Copyright

Protection for unpublished works before federal statute; replaced by the Copyright Act after publication.

2
New cards

Copyright Act of 1976

Federal law protecting original works fixed in a tangible medium and granting exclusive rights.

3
New cards

Copyright

Protects creative expression (books, music, films).

4
New cards

Trademark

Protects brand identifiers (logos, names, slogans).

5
New cards

Copyright Attachment

Occurs automatically when a work is original and fixed in a tangible medium.

6
New cards

Copyright Term (Individual)

Life of author + 70 years.

7
New cards

Copyright Term (Work for Hire)

95 years from publication or 120 years from creation.

8
New cards

Copyright Registration

Required to sue and to obtain statutory damages and attorney’s fees.

9
New cards

Direct Infringement

Personal violation of copyright owner’s rights.

10
New cards

Contributory Infringement

Knowingly assisting or enabling infringement.

11
New cards

Substantial Similarity

Whether an ordinary observer would find works similar.

12
New cards

Extrinsic Test

Objective comparison of specific elements (expert analysis).

13
New cards

Intrinsic Test

Subjective comparison based on ordinary audience impression.

14
New cards

Fair Use (4 Factors)

  1. Purpose/character (transformative?) 2. Nature of work 3. Amount used 4. Effect on market.

15
New cards

Transformative Use

Adds new meaning or message; favors fair use.

16
New cards

Parody

Imitates a work to comment on it; strongly protected.

17
New cards

Work for Hire

Employer owns copyright of employee-created work.

18
New cards

Independent Contractor Rule

Creator owns copyright unless contract states otherwise.

19
New cards

First Sale Doctrine

Owner of a lawful copy can resell it.

20
New cards

Time-Shifting

Recording content to watch later; legal.

21
New cards

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)

Provides safe harbor for platforms and takedown system.

22
New cards

Lenz Case Rule

Copyright holders must consider fair use before takedowns.

23
New cards

Berne Convention

International copyright agreement recognizing rights globally.

24
New cards

Sonny Bono Act

Extended copyright duration (life + 70 years).

25
New cards

Lanham Act

Federal trademark law governing registration and infringement.

26
New cards

Genericide

Trademark becomes generic (e.g., “aspirin”).

27
New cards

Secondary Meaning

Public associates a mark with a specific source.

28
New cards

Dilution

Weakening of a famous trademark (blurring or tarnishment).

29
New cards

Matal v. Tam

Struck down ban on disparaging trademarks.

30
New cards

Iancu v. Brunetti

Struck down ban on immoral/scandalous trademarks.

31
New cards

Obscenity

Unprotected speech.

32
New cards

Indecency

Protected but subject to regulation.

33
New cards

Miller Test

  1. Prurient interest 2. Patently offensive 3. No serious value.

34
New cards

Prurient Interest

Shameful or morbid sexual interest.

35
New cards

Hicklin Rule

Old test focusing on most vulnerable audiences.

36
New cards

Variable Obscenity

Material can be obscene for minors but not adults.

37
New cards

Child Pornography Rule

Completely unprotected speech.

38
New cards

PROTECT Act

Strengthens child pornography laws.

39
New cards

Secondary Effects Doctrine

Regulation based on effects (crime, property value), not content.

40
New cards

Commercial Speech

Speech proposing a commercial transaction.

41
New cards

Central Hudson Test

  1. Lawful & not misleading 2. Substantial gov interest 3. Direct advancement 4. Narrowly tailored.
42
New cards

FTC Authority

Regulates deceptive/unfair advertising.

43
New cards

Corrective Advertising

Forces advertisers to correct misinformation.

44
New cards

Corporate Speech Doctrine

Corporations have First Amendment rights.

45
New cards

Brandenburg Test (Incitement)

Intent + imminent lawless action + likelihood.

46
New cards

Fighting Words Doctrine

Unprotected speech likely to provoke violence.

47
New cards

True Threat Standard (Counterman)

Requires recklessness regarding whether statement is threatening.

48
New cards

Prior Restraint

Government suppression before publication; almost always unconstitutional.

49
New cards

Near v. Minnesota

Established strong presumption against prior restraint.

50
New cards

Pentagon Papers Case

Government failed to justify prior restraint.

51
New cards

O’Brien Test

  1. Gov power 2. Important interest 3. Content-neutral 4. Narrow restriction.

52
New cards

Texas v. Johnson

Flag burning is protected speech.

53
New cards

Tinker Test

Speech allowed unless it causes substantial disruption.

54
New cards

Bethel v. Fraser

Schools can punish vulgar speech.

55
New cards

Hazelwood Test

Schools can regulate school-sponsored speech.

56
New cards

Morse v. Frederick

Schools can restrict pro-drug speech.

57
New cards

New York Times v. Sullivan Rule

Public officials must prove actual malice.

58
New cards

Actual Malice

Knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth.

59
New cards

Gertz Rule

Private individuals must prove negligence.

60
New cards

Bartnicki v. Vopper

Media can publish truthful info of public concern.

61
New cards

Cox Broadcasting v. Cohn

Publishing public records is protected.

62
New cards

Sony v. Universal

Time-shifting is fair use.

63
New cards

Grokster Case

Inducing infringement creates liability.

64
New cards

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose

Parody is fair use.

65
New cards

Warhol v. Goldsmith

Limited transformative use doctrine.

66
New cards

The Supreme Court in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) ruled that high schools may regulate content in student publications:

as long as the regulation is related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.

67
New cards

California’s “Leonard Law,” passed in response to Hazelwood, requires the high school administrators to recognize student newspapers as:

public forms

68
New cards

The sign Morse held up along the Olympic torch route that led to the 2001 case of Morse v. Fredericks said:

Bong Hits for Jesus

69
New cards

Which is not an area of speech that can be regulated in schools:

Political speech

70
New cards
71
New cards
72
New cards
73
New cards
74
New cards
75
New cards
76
New cards
77
New cards
78
New cards
79
New cards
80
New cards
81
New cards
82
New cards
83
New cards
84
New cards
85
New cards