Category Archives: Law School

Ten Reasons Why You Should Teach Here — And Three Why You Shouldn’t (v. 2.0)

I published a version of this essay last year.  At the request of the Chair of the Entry-Level Appointments Committee, to whom I can refuse nothing, I am updating and republishing it.

Ten Reasons Why You Should Teach Here — And Three Why You Shouldn’t (v. 2.0)

1. Faculty

The best reason to come to U.M. is the faculty. At its best (which is to say, “outside of faculty meetings”), this is a faculty that believes ideas are serious things, but also is willing to play with them. You will see this most vividly at faculty seminars, especially those with external speakers. The faculty reads the paper in advance of the talk. It thinks about it. We don’t let the presenter speak a long time — we want to have a discussion. There may be an element of performance in the questions and comments, but that usually just adds to the fun. Unlike some faculties I’ve heard about, we are not worshipers at the temple of sub-disciplinarity: faculty members feel comfortable commenting on papers far outside their own specialties, and they are usually right to do so as the distant perspective sometimes proves at least as valuable as the insider’s. [Update: A recent visiting professor, John Flood, gave a good description of the experience of a Miami seminar in Giving Papers at Miami.]

While faculty vary in the extent to which they will seek you out — some are shy; others are busy — they will almost all be happy to see you if you seek them out. Very few will treat you like a junior colleague; for most, you will be part of the family from the start. And it’s an interesting family, including some big names in international law, tax, law and society, law and identity, and several other subjects.

But don’t take my word for it.  Here’s what one of our more recent hires, Charlton Copeland, said a year ago about his initial impressions of UM Law:

The faculty stood out for me at the AALS recruiting conference as one of the most intellectually engaged faculties with which I met over the weekend. They actually were interested in my writing projects, and gave me the sense that they took them and me seriously. My time with the committee ran out too quickly for me. My feeling of intellectual comfort with the faculty was only enhanced during my visit to the campus later in November, but that was augmented by my delight that this would be a group with which I’d be comfortable beyond simply discussing scholarly work. They were a bit quirky, and in a way about which I am excited. I am excited about the diversity of the city of Miami as well, and the opportunities that I think it will provide me to think about my areas of research in new ways — ranging from race and the the law (where the Law School has long been at the forefront in American legal education) to comparative separation of powers issues in Latin America.

2. Institutional style & institutional support

UM wants productive faculty, and it believes in research. But it isn’t about telling you what to do. My own story may be instructive: I was hired thinking that I would be writing mostly about administrative and constitutional law. In fact, however, within a couple of years I had turned into an Internet lawyer, and was writing primarily about computers, networks and the law. At no time did anyone here ever suggest that this was a problem. What mattered to people was that I was publishing.

Another way in which UM may differ from some law schools is that our faculty is routinely interdisciplinary and international. Many publish in non-legal journals — a fact which does not necessarily help either our publication or citation counts since the legal tabulators tend to focus only on law journals. Although we recognize that there may be some reputational costs, we are not prepared to tell people where they should publish. We just want it to be good.

There is no international ghetto at UM (the same is true of tax, a traditional faculty strength). As a matter of unwritten policy, everyone is expected to teach a basic course outside their specialty; the result is both that we can have more internationalists (and tax scholars), and that there’s a much greater community of overlapping interests.

3. Library

The University of Miami enjoys a superb law library, the result of a decision more than two decades ago to make library acquisitions a financial priority. And if we don’t have it, the library will borrow it for you, no questions asked. (As one former librarian put it, “we aim to provide law-firm-quality service”. And in fact, it is almost as good as a top law firm, and the librarians are much nicer.)

The law library has extensive holdings in related disciplines, notably political science, and of course the university library is literally next door, and it also has ever-growing electronic access to journals — which can even be accessed from your home office. We have a particularly strong collection in Latin American and Caribbean law, but also strong holdings in European law. We are weak in India, China, and Russia, and no doubt several other countries with non-Romance alphabets, so if your research involves heavy use of materials from one of those countries, you should check to see if we have you covered. I also have a sense that our holdings for pre-1940 materials are not as strong generally as for things published in the last 70 years. But I am continually having pleasant surprises when I consult Baron, the online card catalog. They’ve done some impressive buying over the years — which is a good thing, as the next major law library is a long way away.

4. Students

We have smart students with upwardly mobile ambitions. Some come from wealthy families, but for many a law degree will be the highest level of education ever achieved in their families — a matter of pride for an extended clan you may have the good fortune to meet at graduation. Despite the lures of nearby South Beach, UM students are by and large a studious lot: their awareness that few silver platters await at graduation usually translates into a commendable work ethic. At least until the end-of-term fog settles in, I find that my students have done the reading, and often have something to say about it. There is a little shyness — some students don’t want to ask questions for fear of looking silly; other students worry about being labeled a “gunner” — but ordinarily class discussion can be pretty lively. Although we have more men than women as students, it is often the case that the women lead the discussions and make the most substantive contributions. Classes tend to be fun (at least for the instructor). Visiting professors from other law schools consistently remark on the high quality of classroom performance here.

The UM student body has improved greatly in the past decade. Our best students would be at home in any law school. Our worst students would have been near the middle of the class 15 years ago. The only fly in the ointment is that despite their good college grades and creditable LSATs, a substantial fraction of the class comes to law school unable to write as well as they think or speak. Overcoming this obstacle remains one of our biggest challenges. That said, every year we have students who write publishable papers in classes and seminars. It’s been a particular pleasure to see those pieces go into print along side those of full-time academics.

Some of our students will go on to be national leaders; a much larger number will play key roles in the State of Florida, as judges, politicians, and leading members of the bar. Some people have described alumni reunions as state judges’ conventions, but this is slightly unfair. On the other hand, there’s no question that both Florida as a place, and UM graduates as important players in that place, have been at the center of major wrangles with national impact ranging from the 2000 election to the Terri Schiavo affair.

Aspiring faculty sometimes worry that they will not find good research assistants outside a top ten law school. It’s true that I don’t hear stories about students writing papers that professors then publish under their own name — as I did when I was a law student at Yale. But if you are looking for a research assistant rather than a ghost writer, then my experience suggests this is not a serious problem if you teach a first-year class. As a teacher in the larger first year classes you can identify the students who are good and who fit your style before they get too caught up in other things. Some of them will get on law review, and will be too busy to work for you; some of those that don’t will work downtown for higher pay than the law school can offer, but usually there’s someone you will be happy to have who will be happy to have the job in their second or third year. I can’t claim that every research assistant I’ve had has been stellar, but I can say that some of them were amazing — and that they are harder to find when I don’t teach first years.

5. Research support

Research support exists to make it easier for you to write. The most important part of UM’s research support is its excellent law library. But it doesn’t stop there: In addition to the collection itself, we have a staff of helpful law librarians who seem happiest when given difficult research requests. There’s a document delivery service which will get you any book or article you ask for and deliver it to your office within a day if it’s on campus or a few days if it must be sent from far away. (One down side: you can gain weight from the loss of movement caused by having everything come to you.)

At conferences I sometimes hear stories about places where senior colleagues try to tell tenure-track faculty what to write about (or, worse, forbid certain topics or styles). We don’t do that. If anything, we have erred in the other direction — tip-toeing around junior faculty sensibilities so much that we may have provided insufficient mentoring.  In an effort to do better in that department, the faculty now enjoys the services of a “director of faculty development” — yours truly as of a year ago — whose job it is to help colleagues (and especially pre-tenure colleagues) with their research and writing by identifying resources, serving as a sounding board, or just staying out of the way.

In addition, every faculty member has an office budget which allows you to hire a research assistant, books and supplies, and to travel to conferences. Each of these budgets is fairly generous, and the Associate Dean has discretionary funds to add to them up for good cause. In my experience, any cause I can bring myself to ask about has been treated as a good one.

6. The University

A generation ago it was “Suntan U”. Today, under the (very) energetic leadership of Donna Shalala and an impressive suite of Deans, the University of Miami is joining the ranks of the leading research universities in the USA. For openers, President Shalala raised $1 billion for the University. YES, $1 BILLION. Now that it’s in the bank, she’s warming up for a new round of fund-raising. The lion’s share of the first round went to the medical school, but we are told that the law school should be able to claim a bigger share of the next round — and we’ll need it because we’ve also been offered a chance to build a brand new building on a prime location on campus that is already zoned for construction (trust me, that matters).

More importantly, the past couple of decades have seen a transformation in the quality of both the students and the faculty in the arts and sciences. It’s become hard for students to get in; and departments such as History, Psychology, Business, and Sociology have attracted faculties that include a wealth of potential collaborators, adding to existing strengths in Medicine and Communications. Both the law school and the University encourage inter-disciplinary collaboration. The law school has begun to take advantage of these resources (I, for example, am working with a team on health privacy issues that includes participants from both the Business School and the Med School), but there’s much waiting for you that remains untapped.

7. Perks

The law school wants to support your research, and we try to put our money where our mouth is. Entry-level faculty can apply for a summer research grant before starting work in order to prepare their courses. We light-load you (usually only one course per semester) during your first year to give you time to find your feet. You’ll get a summer grant as of right every summer until tenure to encourage you to write — after that you’ll have to submit proposals, and make good on them too. And you’re entitled to a semester’s leave before tenure, more or less in the term of your choice, in order to help you write.

The law school is located on a very beautiful campus in the center of suburban Coral Gables, itself a very pleasant city with excellent restaurants. Rumor has it that in the old days the university administration spent more on landscaping than books; whatever the truth, there’s no question that the campus is very nice to look at. It also sports a state-of-the-art gym that’s about three minutes walk from the law school around our picturesque lake (crocodile optional). The campus sports other useful amenities, including a faculty club, a food court, and an on-campus daycare.

8. Miami

Miami is a cosmopolitan city. Part of its identity is as the defacto capitol of Latin America; part is as an artistic and musical center; and then there’s the celebrity-and-tourist thing. It’s an attractive place for young and old, and — if you take care to live in the right school districts, or have kids who qualify for the right magnet schools, or are ok with private schools — a pretty easy place for the middle-aged pater and mater familias. Like many sunbelt cities, Miami is more sprawling mosaic than urban core and periphery. Both urban and suburban living are within easy reach of the campus. Our politics are fascinating and complex, with much political power held by first and second generation immigrants from Cuba, and to a lesser degree Haiti, and Central America. The region now enjoys a lively cultural life, with a rich music and dance scene and some creditable small theater companies. If you prefer nature to culture, there’s always the nearby Everglades as well as world-class coral reefs for diving just south of Miami.  And one of my colleagues sometimes totes a surfboard.

If your work involves domestic issues, you will find them in Miami, which is the city of the future in ways both good and bad. Along with our glitz you will find us on the cutting edge of today’s and tomorrow’s political and social issues: immigration, environmental (think “Everglades restoration”), medical (think “retirees”), and all the social questions that big cities produce.

Housing costs are plummeting, many other living costs were already low, and there is no state income tax.  Plus, the University has taken bold steps to help faculty find good housing by offering new hires a deal in which the university will subsidize part of your home purchase in exchange for a proportionate share in the equity when you sell, an offer that puts many very nice homes within reach.

9. Weather

Miami’s weather is glorious for almost half the year; variable for another chunk, and miserable in the dog days of summer and early Fall. The good news is that much (but not all) of the miserable part comes when the law school is not in session, so you can escape if you choose. When the weather is nice, our central courtyard, the “bricks,” becomes the social center of the community, a place where students and faculty mingle between classes. Even office rats like me end up looking healthier than the wan, pale, parka-clad figures I see huddling on the Boston subway. For those with outdoor ambitions, you can live on Miami Beach, or just enjoy the sea view from a balcony in a tower apartment in downtown Brickel.

10. The revolution is here

In last year’s edition of this memo, I wrote that the “revolution is coming”.   Well, it’s here.

As a result of an unusually detailed and painstaking strategic planning exercise last year we are undertaking a radical transformation in the faculty, and perhaps the style, of University of Miami School of Law. We have at least six open jobs at present, with the likelihood of much more turnover as faculty retire (couples welcome!). The next three to five years stand a good chance of determining the future course of the school for a generation to come.   Hiring is going to be a big part of that transformation.

At present we have less than half a dozen faculty under 40, only a few more between 40 and 50, another dozen or so between 50 and 60; the single largest group — well over a dozen —  are over sixty, including some well over sixty. Our hiring is resolutely in compliance with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (of our last nine entry-level hires, two were very experienced lawyers well over 40), but given the overall composition of the entry-level market, it is likely that this age profile will change dramatically in the next few years.

But more than simply replacing faculty as they retire, we hope to do something even more dramatic. Under the leadership of Interim Dean Paul Verkuil, we’ve asked the Provost to authorize us to hire a very large number of additional faculty, over and above the half-dozen openings we have already. 

What this means for our new hires is that they will find themselves at the heart of their new community — and have a chance to lead it — much earlier in their careers than they might otherwise. The coming turnover and expansion in the faculty, coupled with this year’s Dean search introduces an element of uncertainty about what we’ll be like in the future that may not be to everyone’s taste. Fortunately, the faculty engaged in a successful strategic planning exercise last year, which means that any new hires will be spared that chore at least.  But it also means that we’re going to be growing and experimenting. 

Today, the law school enjoys a nearly unique chance to reinvent itself, and people with ideas and energy should find all the breathing room and opportunity they want.   We ‘ll create a host of new Centers and Institutes — several are already in advanced stages of planning.  We’re going to change some (but only some) of the ways we do teaching.  We’re going to ramp up the scholarly enterpirse by having more talks, more conferences, more happenings.  And we’re going to be open to your new ideas.

I hope that people reading this will come join us in building something wonderful.

***

All that is very well, but honesty compels me to say that there are also some reasons why not everyone may be happy here. Indeed, there are three main reasons why you should not teach here:

1. Weather

If skiing is your passion, and neither waterskiing nor snorkeling are substitutes, then Miami may make you sad. It’s hot and very humid here from July until the heat breaks sometime in October or September. That means you can have up to three and half months when it’s not much fun to go outside. Plus, occasionally we get weather with a name. But we don’t get snowstorms, avalanches, wildfires, earthquakes, random tornadoes, floods, or mudslides. If you want immunity to natural disasters, move to Rhode Island.

2. Language

Many people in South Florida speak Spanish as their first (and often only) language. The campus is Anglo — although some of the bilingual staff and students will speak Spanish to each other — so this is not a work issue. But it is a life issue: you will hear lots of Spanish in the stores and on AM radio. If you are the sort of person who can’t cope with foreign languages around you, there’s a strong chance you will not be happy here. I don’t speak Spanish, and I only found it a noticeable handicap for my first few weeks here, when I would get lost driving around and stop at a store for directions, then wait impatiently while they went to find the English-speaker. It’s a non-issue today unless I happen to go bargain shopping for some exotic household good, and indeed contributes to Miami’s cosmopolitan vibe.

3. Geography

It’s flat here — no mountains (and houses have no basements). More seriously, it’s also far from many of the legal nerve centers. If you’re doing national work and you are having meetings related to it, odds are the meeting will neither be in Miami nor even within driving distance. That means air travel. And while we have great direct air connections to most of the world and the law school is generous with travel support, we do not have a working time machine. Given the post-9/11 security regime at airports, and the increasing vagaries of air travel generally, it is rarely possible to have a meeting in New York or Washington without spending the night out of town. That can mean having to reschedule a class (something we allow for good causes), which is a pain for you and even more of one for your students. It certainly means that doing national committee work is always a substantial time commitment. It is almost 500 miles to the state line, and then where are you? Somewhere between Tallahassee and Moultrie, Ga.

***

This year I am not on our entry-level hiring committee, but I am on our lateral hiring committee.  Whichever group you fall into, if you find the positives outweigh the negatives and have an interest in coming here, I’d be happy to try to answer any further questions you might have, either in comments to this entry or by private email.  Get in touch.

Posted in Law School, Miami | 4 Comments

Of Coase and Coercion

A note to myself, but you're invited to listen in and comment if you'd like. [Update: comments glitch fixed.]

If I were teaching a first year legal “toolbox” course, I'd certainly teach Coase as part of it. And I'd include something like this too: Unenumerated: The Coase Theorem is false: contracts depend on tort law.

The proof that the Coase Theorem is false is actually quite simple: the assumptions of the Theorem contradict each other. The assumption that transactions are voluntary contradicts the assumption that any prior allocation of rights is possible, including rights that allow one party to coerce another. In fact, for the Theorem to at all make sense, a very large and crucial set of prior rights allocations must be excluded — namely any that allow any party to coerce another.

But we can't generally solve externalities problems by bargaining under this revised assumption. Externalities cannot be neatly distinguished from coercive acts, as extending one of Coase's own examples illustrates. In this example we have a railroad with a train that, passing by a farmer's wheat field, gives off sparks, which may start a fire in the field. In Coase's account, the prior allocation of rights might give the railroad the right to give off sparks, in which case the farmer must either plant his wheat far enough away from the railroad (wasting land) or buy the right to be free from sparks from the railroad. The prior allocation might instead already give the farmer the right to be completely free from sparks, in which case the railroad can either buy the right to emit sparks from the farmer or install spark-suppressors. If these are the two possible prior allocations of rights, Coase concluded that the railroad and the farmer will in the absence of transaction costs bargain to the most economically efficient outcome: if it costs less for the railroad to reduce the sparks than for the farmer to keep an unplanted firebreak, bargaining will achieve this outcome, and if the reverse, bargaining will achieve the reverse outcome, regardless of whether the farmer initially had the right to be free from sparks. So far, so good — it seems, on the surface, that if bargaining is costless an efficient outcome will be achieved.

The problem is that these are not the only prior allocations possible. The Coase Theorem is supposed to work under any other allocation of prior rights. But it doesn't. It fails for a large and crucially important class of prior allocations: namely any that allow one party to coerce another.

But I don't teach a first year “toolbox” course. Indeed, we don't have such a course. (We have “Elements” which — I'm told — is about how to read lines of cases, something which is important but different.)

I do, however, teach a Jurisprudence course of my own devising. I do “Of Coase and Cattle” there. Should I add something like this? It would be a distraction from where I'm trying to go, but maybe a useful one.

Then again, if I really let myself get distracted, I'd soon be trying to explain why the solution to the problem here is Habermassian, not libertarian. And that would take me very far from where the course is currently designed to go. But maybe I should bite the bullet and take it there? But that would make it much more of a philosophy course, and much less of an analytic jurisprudence course, than I intend it to be.

Posted in Law School | 8 Comments

Annals of Progress

This just in:

Dear Faculty:

After careful consideration and to better reflect the services and resources we provide to our students and alumni, we are pleased to announce that the Career Planning Center is now called the Career Development Office (CDO). The role of law school career offices throughout the country, including our office, has considerably changed in the last decade. Career offices have expanded their role by giving students and alumni lifelong services that not only help the students and alumni identify and use the appropriate resources to obtain their first jobs but also help them assess and discover their ideal careers. We feel that the new name accurately represents this progressive change and ask you to join us in using the name and sharing it with others in our community. Also, please note our new website address: www.law.miami.edu/cdo.

I'm not a big believer in name changes. On the other hand, I am pleased to see that the whatever-you-call-it has adopted a suggestion of mine and resumed making business cards available to students:

Student Business Cards are Here!

The Career Development Office is pleased to offer business cards to current students.  For more information please click here.

And I think business card style option “B” looks pretty good.

UM Student business card option B

Posted in Law School | 1 Comment

Paul Verkuil to Be Interim Dean at U. Miami Law

Paul Verkuil, Professor (and former Dean) at Cardozo, will be the Interim Dean at UM for a one-year period. Here's the official bio from Cardozo:

Professor Verkuil was dean of Cardozo from 1997 to 2001. After practice at two leading law firms in New York, he served on the law faculty of University of North Carolina, as dean of Tulane Law School, and as president of the College of William and Mary. From 1992 to 1995 he was president and CEO of the American Automobile Association. Professor Verkuil was a visiting professor at the University of Pennsylvania and served as Special Master in the case of New Jersey v. New York involving the sovereignty of Ellis Island. He is a life fellow of the American Bar Foundation and of the American Law Institute. Professor Verkuil is coauthor of Administrative Law and Process (4th ed. 2004) and Regulation and Deregulation (2nd ed. 2004). He is a leading scholar of law and regulation and has published more than 60 articles in this field

Dean Verkuil's tenure will start officially on August 1, coincidentally the day I'll be getting back to Miami from a trip starting tomorrow.

Posted in Law School | 6 Comments

Work-Study Effects

In college they always used to tell us that the people on work study got better grades because they were forced to manage their time more carefully. Maybe not?

Jeffrey S. DeSimone, NBER Working Paper, The Impact of Employment during School on College Student Academic Performance,

From the abstract:

This paper estimates the effect of paid employment on grades of full-time, four-year students from four nationally representative cross sections of the Harvard College Alcohol Study administered during 1993-2001. The relationship could be causal in either direction and is likely contaminated by unobserved heterogeneity. Two-stage GMM regressions instrument for work hours using paternal schooling and being raised Jewish, which are hypothesized to reflect parental preferences towards education manifested in additional student financial support but not influence achievement conditional on maternal schooling, college and class. Extensive empirical testing supports the identifying assumptions of instrument strength and orthogonality. GMM results show that an additional weekly work hour reduces current year GPA by about 0.011 points, roughly five times more than the OLS coefficient but somewhat less than recent estimates. Effects are stable across specifications, time, gender, class and age, but vary by health status, maternal schooling, religious background and especially race/ethnicity.

From the conclusion:

… a 30-hour work week lowers the average grade by one mark, i.e. from A– to B+, compared with not participating in the labor market at all.

These results are consistent with what some college instructors regularly experience: students who blame class tardiness and absence, failure to submit assignments and poor exam performance on their employment obligations. However, the findings of this study suggest that the negative relationship between labor supply and grades is not simply attributable to less academically motivated students working long hours. In that case, the aforementioned hypothetical lackluster students would not necessarily perform better academically if they were prevented from working, which is simply an activity to which bad students devote more time than good students. Instead, students who spend longer hours in paid labor because of preferences or budget constraints related to their fathers’ schooling attainment and attitudes ultimately perform worse in school than they otherwise would.

Full text – PDF (216 K). Paper spotted via Eszter's Blog.

I wonder to what extent if any these effects are valid for law students — and especially to what extent it is age-related. (And, if we're going to put in special testing for the effect of college-student family stereotypes, why Jewish and not Asian?)

Posted in Law School | 6 Comments

Everything is a Law School Hypo

I enjoyed this video, Barbri Girl, from the 2008 NYU Law Revue.

I'm afraid, however, that the reason I liked it so much isn't simply that it's sort of funny, and at its start so true to life. No, it's because there's a legal issue embedded in here — probably unintentionally — regarding whether anyone has grounds to sue over this video. And that just seems so appropriate given the subject matter.

See, the song on which this skit is based is the wonderful/awful “Barbie Girl” by Aqua, a Danish-Norwegian pop-punk band. The song was the subject of a major trademark lawsuit by Mattel.

A video accompanying the original song is available on YouTube. I'm pretty sure I saw a much less camp, and somewhat harder-edged, performance of it back when the song was being litigated — something vaguely like a studio version of the start of this — but maybe I'm imagining things.

Getting back to the law, Mattel was basically handed its head on a plate by the 9th Circuit. In a decision sure to be in every IP casebook, Judge Alex Kozinski not only said the song was protected as a parody under the First Amendment but concluded the decision with the admonition that, “The parties are advised to chill.” See Mattel Inc. v. MCA Records Inc., 296 F.3d 894 (2002).

But here's where the fun starts: “Barbie Girl” was clearly a parody of the Barbie image. This video, however, is not. But that's ok because as “BAR/BRI Girl” the trademark being parodied isn't Mattel's so they have no grounds for suit.

As for BAR/BRI themselves, they can't sue, for the same reasons that Mattel's suit against Aqua was baseless.

But here comes the (weak, legal) joke: the people who have a potential right of action against the NYU law students in the Barbri Girl video are Aqua! It's a real stretch to say that the Barbri Girl video is a parody of Aqua's song. [Contrast Barbri Girl with this “Ugly Girl” parody song, sometimes attributed to Weird Al Yankovic, here supported by some Sims 2 Machinima.] Rather, BarBri Girl appropriates the tune (and more) of Barbie Girl for a satirical purpose other than parody of the source. And — unless copyright law has changed since I last looked — that sort of satire isn't necessarily a protected First Amendment use of a copyrighted tune, cf. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994); Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. Penguin Books USA, 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997).

But don't panic. Despite using the whole tune, and some of the look and feel of the original video, Barbri Girl is probably fair-use anyway, since the use is not commercially motivated and indeed is arguably for nonprofit educational purposes, and will have no “negative effect … upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.” (per the Supreme Court in the 2 Live Crew decision).

And most importantly, I don't think Aqua is going to sue.

By the way, none of this stuff is going to be on the bar exam.

Posted in Law School, Law: Copyright and DMCA, Law: Trademark Law | 2 Comments