The Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts (LTA Journal) has published its Winter 2014 Issue. The LTA Journal publishes concise legal analysis aimed at practicing attorneys on a quarterly basis.
In the issue’s first article, “The Internet and the Constitution: A Selective Perspective,” the Honorable M. Margaret McKeown of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit offers her retrospective thoughts on the ways courts have handled constitutional issues in Internet cases. She also discusses some of the challenges currently facing courts and legislators alike as the U.S. legal system incorporates and accommodates Internet-based technologies and the societal, commercial, governmental, and relational changes they spawn.
The issue’s second article was written by John Morgan and Veronica Sandoval and is titled “Pacific Northwest Perspective: The Impact of the America Invents Act on Nonprofit Global Health Organizations.” The article explores the effects of the AIA on nonprofit research organizations dedicated to global health and life sciences, and reports the perspectives of counsel representing such organizations throughout the Pacific Northwest.
Managing Articles Editor Pedro Celis wrote the third article, “When is a YouTube Video a ‘True Threat’?” The article discusses the circuit split on whether 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) and other similar federal threat statutes require the defendant to possess a subjective intent to threaten, and applies the subjective intent requirement to YouTube videos.
University of Washington School of Law student, Sam Méndez, contributed the third article, “Aereo and Cablevision: How Courts Are Struggling to Harmonize the Public Performance Right With Online Retransmission of Broadcast Television.” The article discusses the pending Supreme Court case American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc., and argues that Aereo is infringing the broadcasters’ public performance right and that by expanding on the earlier decision Cartoon Network LP, LLLP v CSC Holdings, Inc., the Second Circuit misinterpreted the text and the spirit of the Copyright Act.