You may recently have felt a great disturbance in The Force. It wasn’t the Palm Springs earthquake, or Lindsay Lohan’s courtroom meltdown. Nope, it was the “Star Wars Smackdown” instigated by George Lucas a few weeks ago.

Lucas is looking to “force” (I know, I know…) Hong Kong based laser manufacturer Wicked Lasers to change the design of a high powered laser product he feels looks too much like the famous (but fictional) lightsaber from his landmark films. His company, Lucasfilm Ltd., has sent a cease-and-desist letter threatening legal action if the laser company refuses to make appropriate alterations or remove the product from the market outright. Lucas apparently perceives the laser as a copyright threat; according to CNN, the letter challenges that “[i]t is apparent from the design of the Pro Arctic Laser that it was intended to resemble the hilts of our lightsaber swords which are protected by copyright.” Continue reading the full story . . . »

I’m a mom. I’ve experienced the miracle of childbirth, and it truly is wondrous (and terrifying and, well, sticky). Yet I’ve always been confounded by the popular practice of bringing a camera into the delivery room to chronicle this incredibly private and moving moment. The purpose for many seems to be to hold uncomfortable slide shows for friends and family. That’s entertainment? Personally, I just don’t get it.

Still, during pregnancy, I found myself addicted to the plethora of childbirth reality shows, in which the process of labor and delivery (and typically the first few weeks of baby’s life) is documented with Jacques Cousteau-like surveillance, and then run five days a week on basic cable for all to see. I found it fascinating, yet couldn’t help but ask myself: why do people sign up for this? With all due respect to Andy Warhol, not everyone needs to be famous for fifteen minutes, particularly women in labor and gooey, newborn babies. Many apparently disagree, and to you I say: better you than me. Continue reading the full story . . . »

Science-fiction author and futurist Arthur C. Clarke famously formulated three laws of prediction, the first of which posits: “When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.” The same could be said of copyright law.

If you believe categorically that something is not copyrightable, you may well be wrong. You have a much better shot at being right if you conclude that this something possibly could be copyrightable, because the answer to the question “Is it subject to copyright protection?” is, more often than not, “It depends.” In other words, the law of copyright is weird, wacky and wonderful. Continue reading the full story . . . »