Skidaway Institute of Oceanography
DigitalCommons@University of Georgia School of LawNot a member yet
17912 research outputs found
Sort by
Welcoming Remarks
Get PDFShort welcoming remarks by Executive Symposium Editors Braden T. Meadows and Austin Headrick
Built Binary: Rethinking the Incarceration of Transgender Individuals Within a Dual-Gendered Prison System
Get PDFThere are an estimated 1.6 million transgender individuals in the United States. Yet the nation’s prison systems have retained their traditional binary structure, separating male and female inmates. The federal Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) became effective in 2012, outlining best practices for the housing of transgender inmates. In recent years, there have been several court decisions that have directly and indirectly increased the protections available to transgender inmates. Many states have also passed legislation updating their prison policies to address these issues, but these measures have not been uniform. Some states have not yet adopted the PREA recommendations while others have gone beyond the federal proposals. Some advocates believe that PREA itself is an insufficient response to the issues facing transgender inmates and propose alternative solutions. This Note argues that prison housing reform must carefully balance the safety of transgender inmates with that of cisgender inmates. It proposes that the case-by-case approach found in PREA—if implemented with appropriate limitations—is the most realistic, immediate, and effective way of ensuring the greatest protection of all inmates. It concludes that a uniform prison housing policy for transgender inmates, heightened judicial review of these policies, and a factored evaluation of individual inmates will progress the United States prison system beyond its current binary bounds while upholding the fundamental safety goals of the carceral system
Eliminating Ghostwriters: How a Federal Right of Publicity Can Save the Music Industry from Generative Artificial Intelligence
Get PDFCopyright law is currently incapable of resolving challenges introduced by the use of generative artificial intelligence, or generative AI, in the music industry. This technology is being adopted by both copyright holders and licensees, as well as independent artists and third-party applications. In 2023, online producer Ghostwriter created a song (Heart on My Sleeve) directly influenced by copyrighted materials from global artists Drake and The Weeknd using AI technology. The composition garnered millions of listeners across social media and streaming platforms. However, neither the original artists nor their music group (i.e., Universal Music Group) provided Ghostwriter a license to utilize copyrighted works. This is just one instance illustrating how generative AI has created a global environment mired with vulnerable music industry stakeholders, complex questions of authorship and infringement, and an abundance of confused listeners.
This Note examines current shortcomings of copyright law, analyzes recent examples of generative artificial intelligence impacting the music industry, and discusses current regulatory and common law guidance concerning AI technology. It will also study the music industry’s underlying concerns about AI-generated works and review the frail industry defenses being adopted against unpermitted users. Further, this Note proposes that a statutory federal right of publicity is the solution for the music industry to promote the advancement of generative AI technology while protecting copyright holders and licensees. This Note outlines the necessity of a statutory federal right of publicity before laying the groundwork for how it can be incorporated as a prong in the affirmative defense of fair use during a copyright analysis
Slowing Down Fast Fashion: How Improved Intellectual Property Law Can Protect Designers and Promote Sustainability
Get PDFFast fashion, characterized as clothing made quickly and cheaply, can be seen as a solution for consumers who want to participate in current fashion trends at price points they can afford. While creating a solution for consumers, fast fashion creates even greater problems for both the environment and the designers responsible for creating the clothing everyone wants to wear.
In order to keep up with consumer demand for low-cost, trendy items, many fast fashion retailers look to the work of other designers to determine what to create and sell. In doing so, the line between inspiration and imitation may be crossed, with little intellectual property protection in place to protect designers or provide consequences for fast fashion copyists. Once a design enters production, the harm extends to the environment with impacts at each stage of the clothing life cycle.
This Note analyzes the relationship between fast fashion’s environmental destruction and the insufficiency of current intellectual property law in protecting fashion designers from fast fashion copyists. With fast fashion at the root of both issues, this Note argues for a new amendment to the Vessel Hull Design Protection Act following in the footsteps of H.R. 2511 and the Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act. In making this argument, this Note further delves into the inadequacies and limitations of current environmental laws and regulations regarding fast fashion production. Finally affording fashion designers the robust intellectual property protection they need will not only deter and decrease production of fast fashion knockoffs, but also reduce fast fashion production—lessening the severe impact of the fast fashion industry on the environment
Rage against the Machine: Copyright Infringement in AI-Generated Music
Get PDFAI-generated music has garnered significant attention, with many raising concerns about the new technology’s potential impact on both the music industry and human creativity. Others, including some musicians, have expressed excitement about AI and its potential for furthering creativity. Much focus has been placed on “deepfakes” of famous musicians, but there is also the issue of the use of copyrighted songs as training inputs for AI music generators. Some have argued that this machine learning process constitutes widespread copyright infringement, though it is not clear how courts will address this novel phenomenon. This Note examines AI-generated music through the lens of traditional copyright doctrines, analyzing the viability of fair use and de minimis defenses to infringement claims against AI-generated music. Special concerns relating to the Ninth Circuit’s concept of intermediate copying and AI-generated music will also be considered. By analogizing generative AI to digital sampling and considering the basic goals of copyright law, this Note will argue that there are policy reasons for findings of no infringement where the final output of the AI is not substantially similar to any of its inputs
