RECOMMENDED PRO BONO & AFFORDABLE LEGAL SERVICES
This catalogue of legal clinics and law resources represents some of the free and reasonably affordable legal services available to anyone in need.
IIPSJ IP Law and Policy Think Tank
From its inception in 2002, IIPSJ has developed and disseminated forward-looking ideas about social justice perspectives on and implications of intellectual property law. One of its earliest actions was sponsoring a symposium on IP and social justice which resulted in a number of published articles. It has also started an online library of relevant works. IIPSJ’s principals have presented papers, published articles, infuse their IP courses with social justice perspectives, and advocated social justice positions on various public issues.
In 2010 IIPSJ formalized this aspect of its social justice work with the creation of the IP Law and Policy Think Tank. The IIPSJ Think Tank works with ideas, of course, and it also actively engages target audiences both in the development and implementation of impact programs. While the Think Tank is always examining issues from the perspective of the effect of choices on social justice concerns, the IIPSJ Think Tank is structured flexibly to adapt to the evolving IP environment and various issues it presents.
The Think Tank's core activities are:
- Organizing and hosting scholarly symposia and policy roundtables,
- Hosting and sponsoring visiting scholars and fellows to introduce and develop topical initiatives and permanent programs;
- Conducting and sponsoring targeted research on social justice implications of IP law, policy, and administration;
- Writing, presenting, and distributing position statements and comments on IP-related initiatives by the United States and in the international realm;
- Developing and maintaining Information repositories and other resources for scholars, policymakers, IP creators, IP users, and IP entrepreneurs;
- Collaborating with other NGOs, pedagogical institutions, and IP-interest entities on each of these to further IIPSJ’s social justice objectives; and
- Developing and implementing programs ranging from professional conferences to workshops to hands-on mentoring and provision of services on identified issues.
The IIPSJ Law and Policy Think Tank is the only think tank dedicated to evaluating IP law and policy and related issues from the social justice perspectives of inclusion and empowerment. The Think Tank functions as an incubator for social justice-oriented IP legislative development and amendment; IP Civil Rights activism and community awareness, education, entrepreneurship, and empowerment; and scholarly and professional involvement on important national and international IP law and policy controversies.
The IIPSJ Think Tank uses a multi-disciplinary approach, designed to steward IP law and policy toward a more socially cognizant and equitable IP regime. The IIPSJ Think Tank generates and facilitates collaboration and discourse among legal, scientific, and economic scholars, as well as legislators, policymakers, jurists, practicing attorneys, and civil rights and social activists; conducts research, legislative briefings, public comments, and publications; and promotes and organizes community, activist, and professional coalition building.
The 2011-12 Think Tank program is designed to build upon the important relationships developed in the past year and to capitalize on IIPSJ’s unique achievements and national reputation. Through its past efforts and current plans, the IIPSJ Think Tank is well poised to become a prominent voice for IP-related social justice and civil rights interests.
Among its activities in the 2010-11 program year, the IIPSJ Think Tank:
- Organized the first National IP Social Justice Summit of IP government officials, policymakers, scholars, professionals, and community leaders;
- Conducted a Congressional Policy Briefing on IP and Civil Rights;
- Organized and hosted an IP and Social Justice Scholars Roundtable;
- Prepared and disseminated position papers and submitted comments to Congress and various governmental agencies regarding IP law and policy issues.
In 2011-12, the IIPSJ Think Tank will continue to do such work with particular emphasis on:
- A Legislative IP Social Justice Awareness Initiative, through which it will prepare and submit position statements, public comments, legislative proposals, and otherwise provide information to Congress and other legislative and governmental authorities regarding IP law amendment, enforcement, and social justice interests;
- An IP and Civil Rights Activism Project, through which it will further organize an IP Civil Rights Coalition for IP education, activism, and Digital Entrepreneurship; and
- An IP Scholar Activist Project, through which it will conduct and sponsor scholarly research, conferences, and publications intended to heighten legislative, judicial, practitioner, and social activist awareness of domestic and international IP social justice issues and options for change.
IP Empowerment Program
General Information
IIPSJ has an ongoing IP Empowerment Program working to empower marginalized communities economically, socially, and politically through their development, use, and lawful exploitation of IP. One of the steps in this ongoing program was the IP Empowerment Summit held on November 5, 2010. (In addition to the information below, the Summit Circular can be downloaded in pdf form.) Ongoing work is being done by committees and interest groups working on particular projects identified at the Summit and through partnering with the USPTO, NAACP, and other organizations.
IIPSJ IP Empowerment Summit
On November 5, 2010, the Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice (IIPSJ) conducted its first National IP Empowerment Summit at the Howard University School of Law. The IP Empowerment Summit brought together a diverse group of IP professionals, including IP lawyers from private practice, in-house counsel, and academia, to collaborate with legislators and public interest and community activists to devise strategies for community development built around artistic works and technological innovation.
IIPSJ IP Summit Empowerment Committees will be formed to create both discrete plans on particular topics and to collectively construct a blueprint to help educate and empower socio-economically marginalized communities to protect and commercially exploit their own IP works for their own benefit. We expect these efforts to lead to the establishment of IP Empowerment Zones in strategic urban locations. The groups to be served include associations of artists; students in fine arts, engineering, and science degree programs; community development association; and inventors. IIPSJ IP Summit attorneys will also work to empower attorneys serving these communities to develop the competencies and skills to carry out this work.
IP practitioners from a variety of law firms, in-house counsel departments, academic institutions, and public interest organizations have committed to participate in the IP Empowerment Summit, and plans are underway to link this program to similar initiatives around the nation.
The Need for IP-Focused Empowerment Strategies
In today's information-based economy, economic power is often dependent upon intellectual property. Consequently, IP attorneys can and should take the lead in empowering minority and other marginalized communities to compete for and attain a stake in the 21st century economy. Stimulating an increase in ethnic diversity within the intellectual property bar is a major objective of the Summit, and is a key means to implement the empowerment strategies.
IIPSJ IP Empowerment Summit Core Principles and Objectives
The core principles underlying IIPSJ's community IP empowerment program are:
- Education about IP rights and their value is central to the tasks at hand;
- Helping protect IP rights is a necessary step toward beneficial exploitation of the IP rights;
- Entrepreneurial values and skills are necessary for success of the program; and
- Political activism and legislative lobbying will play a valuable part in any such undertaking.
The one-day IP Empowerment Summit will bring together patent, trademark and copyright attorneys, other IP professionals, and members of the public interest and community action sectors, to meet, discuss, learn, and network about how they can implement the underlying principles through:
- Diversifying the field of IP practice;
- Empowering minority and marginalized communities through the vehicle of IP protection and exploitation; and
- Sharing best practices in an effort to further their professional careers and ascend to strategic positions through which to effectuate social change.
IP Empowerment Summit Pilot Community Programs
The IP Empowerment Summit will function as a clearinghouse of valuable information concerning minority artists, inventors, entrepreneurs, and IP professionals. Information regarding market opportunities and business development trends will also be developed as will a national database of minority IP lawyers. Much of this information will be captured at the Summit and then disseminated through IIPSJ’s website (www.iipjs.org). Summit participants will be invited to join permanent IP Empowerment Action Committees to assess and use the data, and to deploy the IP empowerment agenda through various community programs which include:
Minority Students in Science and Engineering Road Show
This program will engage law students, attorneys, and academicians in the development and presentation of "IP Road Show" programs designed to expose undergraduate minority science, engineering, and fine arts students to the fundamentals of IP law. The twin objectives of this program are to apprise students of information needed to exploit successfully their creative works as well as to expose them to the option of pursuing legal careers in the IP field.
Community IP Rights and Education Program
This program will educate high school and college students as well as community creative artists and inventors about the interconnected themes of the nature of intellectual property rights and of the value of exploiting creator's and inventor's rights. Law students and practicing IP attorneys will undertake to familiarize members of the target communities with the benefits of IP protection, and to help them to more fully appreciate that they are both creative artists and inventors as well as IP end-users. Community artists and inventors will learn how weak creator/inventor rights diminish their own prospects for IP-related economic empowerment. The program will include exploration of public domain material as a preferred source for user-generated content and private innovation since such material has fewer legal restrictions and concomitantly greater prospects for entrepreneurial success.
IP Talent Development Program
This program will bring together IP professionals and entrepreneurs to assist marginalized creative artists and inventors in the propitious exploitation of their creative output in the digital age. Sponsored community workshops and laboratories will provide development facilities, IP-related educational and vocational information, and opportunities for artistic license arrangements and technology transfer agreements.
IP Empowerment and Political Activism Project
This multi-faceted project will seek to increase public awareness and understanding of IP, will engage in political activism through community building around IP issues, and will function as a legislative developments think tank. IP professionals, educators, and public interest and community activists will collaborate on policy initiatives and lobbying efforts intended to impact IP legislation and government initiatives to ensure a close fit between IP rights and empowerment of minorities and other marginalized groups.
IIPSJ Program Date: November 5, 2010
The schedule for the IP Empowerment Program may be downloaded in PDF form.
Sponsors and Supporters
IIPSJ IP and Civil Rights Conference | 2012
IIPSJ's IP and Civil Rights Conference was held on Thursday, May 17, 2012 at the Howard University School of Law. Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. was the keynote speaker. The conference brochure in pdf form is available for download. The conference was cosponsored by IIPSJ and the Black Leadership Forum (BLF).
From left to right: IIPSJ Director Lateef Mtima; Rev. Jesse Jackson; Prof. Roger Groves (Fla. Coastal School of Law); IIPSJ Assoc. Dir. Steven Jamar at IIPSJ IP and Civil Rights Conference - May 17, 2012.
Recently Released Book
Professor Lateef Mtima, along with several other authors, recently released a book that is now available for purchase. Click here for more information!
In the Information Age, historically marginalized groups and developing nations continue to strive for socio-economic empowerment within the global community. Their ultimate success largely depends upon their ability to develop, protect and exploit their greatest natural resource: intellectual property. Through an exploration of the techniques used in social entrepreneurship, Intellectual Property, Entrepreneurship and Social Justice provides a framework by which historically marginalized communities and developing nations can cooperate with the developed world to establish a socially cohesive global intellectual property order. Divided into four parts, knowledgeable contributors discuss topics surrounding entrepreneurship and empowerment, education and advocacy, engagement and activism and, finally, commencement toward “IP Empowerment”. Experts in the field, scholars, law professors and students of intellectual property, human rights and international trade and development will find this book to be both resourceful and thought-provoking.
15th anniversary
Celebrating 15 Years
of Intellectual Property &
Social Justice CLE
“The IP and Social Justice CLE Program was established and has been sustained by members of the Bench, Bar, and corporate and institutional supporters who envision the principles of access, inclusion, and empowerment as inherent to the social function of IP protection. This annual exploration of cutting edge developments in IP law, informed by consideration of social justice issues, is fittingly enriched by the most consistently diverse congregation of CLE IP faculty and attendees in the nation. It is a privilege to be a part of this enduring, collaborative effort to assist IP lawyers in achieving the Houstonian professional equipoise of technical proficiency in service to the greater societal good.”
- Professor Lateef Mtima
Much of Howard University’s history is about courageous people who put their lives on the line to open the door to opportunity not just for some people but for all. Intellectual property is all about opportunity and the protection of individual rights—opportunity based not on your ethnicity or your sexual preference, or the color of your skin, your religious beliefs, or your station in life, but instead on your creativity, your ingenuity, your intellect, and your abilities. Intellectual property is about opportunity and protecting the creative rights of all people, whoever they might be. In that sense, intellectual property has much in common with the struggle for social justice. I congratulate Howard University and Professor Lateef Mtima, the Founder and Director of the Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice, for fifteen years of excellence in educating the future leaders of the intellectual property bar. – Judge Richard Linn
Thoughts from Those There at the Beginning
Read more about the start of the CLE program here.
15 years ago, Howard University School of Law was pretty much an unknown on the IP front. But under the leadership of Professor Mtima and others at Howard, the IP and Social Justice CLE was inaugurated. Outside lawyers and distinguished members of the Judiciary have volunteered their time to the CLE to greatly increase the IP profile of Howard. For me, it has been enormously satisfying to watch this growth. May it continue. – Thomas Irving
From inspirational vision of Professor Mtima and so many others at Howard University School of Law, we celebrate the 15th Anniversary of IIPSJ’s Annual IP and Social Justice conference. The conference has benefitted from the staunch support of judges, corporate counsels, outside counsels, and of course the fabulous Howard law students. It has been an absolute privilege and honor serving as the Chair of this conference and witnessing its growth over the years. Congratulations on the 15th Anniversary! – Esther Lim
I had the honor of being part of the creation of the Institute and the many wonderful “firsts” - the first CLE program, The first internship at Finnegan Henderson, the first special edition of the law journal, the first visit to the chambers of the CAFC, the first WIPO attendance etc. - It was a tremendous amount of work for an ever evolving cause with countless unanticipated rewards that flow-through my career and life. In fifteen short years, Institute has had an immeasurable impact on a macro and micro level on society, law, lawyers, entrepreneurs, inventors, creators and justice and has enabled me to work to leave a legacy that will inspire future generations. I am forever grateful. – Tameka Simmons
___________________________________________
IP & SOCIAL JUSTICE THROUGH THE YEARS
Through tireless efforts of Prof. Mtima most especially, but also through the supportive and independent efforts of many the others including especially those who have supported and continue to support IIPSJ, the social justice perspective has now worked its way into the very fabric IP discourse and reform at all levels of IP law, policy, advocacy, and administration. I have been most pleased to have been able to contribute to this project for the past 15 years and plan to continue to do so for awhile yet. – Steven Jamar
2007 Intellectual Property and Social Justice Symposium
Introductory Remarks: Applying the Intellectual Property Law in the Public Interest: Copyrights And the Public Use of Software
Presentation: Granting Patents Based On Race: The Practitioner’s Role in Shaping Social Policy
2009 Intellectual Property and Social Justice Symposium Presentation: Where Intellectual Property Theory Meets ‘Outsider’ Jurisprudence–What African-American Cultural Production Can Teach IP Policy
2011 Intellectual Property and Social Justice Symposium Presentation: Intellectual Property and the Pursuit of Civil Rights: Issues & Challenges for the Digital Information Age
2014 Intellectual Property and Social Justice Luncheon Presentation: Intellectual Property Social Justice: Civil Rights and Economic Empowerment in the 21st
It has been my honor and privilege to participate in Howard’s IP and Social Justice CLE for more than ten years. This is the only CLE of which I am aware that is focused on highlighting the intersection of intellectual property and social justice. It is through this CLE and other work that IIPSJ demonstrates a commitment to ensuring equal access to our intellectual property systems, domestically and abroad. - Toni Y. Hickey
2017 Intellectual Property and Social Justice Luncheon Keynote: Property, Intellectual Property, and Social Justice: Mapping the Next Frontier
CLE Impact & Opportunities
The CLE programs help HUSL alumni and other practitioners develop and maintain expertise in IP practice and provide opportunities for experienced minority IP lawyers to demonstrate their expertise to an audience they might not otherwise reach. The CLE programs also provide networking opportunities for lawyers from diverse groups including attorneys from private practice, from government, from the judiciary, and from academia.
Having attended Howard University School of Law and entered into the IP profession as a patent attorney prior to the establishment of the IP & Social Justice CLE Program, I am so very honored and proud to see the impact that it has had on the students and the IP community as a whole by providing opportunities that previously were hard to come by or not available at all for diverse lawyers in IP law. – Jennifer M. Hayes
As a proud member of the class of 2005… I continue to take pride in this program as an essential element of my continuing legal education. The CLE is uniquely rooted in Howard’s mission of social justice, offering invaluable insights from esteemed members of the bar and bench. I am honored to join the 15th year of this program, and I look forward to returning for many years to come. – Idris McKelvey
The IIPSJ CLE event has been essential in helping to direct the trajectory of my career. Every year I have participated, through the various modules and panel discussions, I walked away with a solid grasp of the current trends in the profession. Moreover, I emerged with an understanding of the future direction of the profession. Thus, I have been able to align my professional experiences with the ever evolving field of Intellectual Property. – Ulysses Williams
I came to Howard Law School with the intent to use my law degree to effect change... Attending the IP & Social Justice CLE program ... I gained a clearer understanding of the intellectual property-related social justice issues not only concerning disenfranchised people in the United States, but around the world. It is an invaluable program and service to the larger community. – Aisha (Williams) Cassis
Prior to attending law school, I spent more than a decade in the biotechnology arena as a scientist. When I entered Howard University School of Law in 2013, I knew that I wanted to be a patent attorney, however, I did not have a strong network of mentors in the patent field. I quickly joined the Howard University School of Law, Intellectual Property Student Association, and benefited from the mentorship of Professor Lateef Mtima. By attending the IP & Social Justice CLE Program each year, I was afforded the unparalleled opportunity to forge new mentoring relationships with practicing attorneys in the IP arena, and learn about emerging IP issues. This unique experience helped guide my career and continues to do so. Currently, I am a second year associate at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. – Candice R. Jones
Phil Hampton has graciously volunteered his time to participate in the CLE every year.
As a student here I benefited from mentoring by Professor Mtima and participation in the CLE, and soon found my passion in the practice of trademark law. By participating as an attorney, I am able to stay up to date and involved with issues of intellectual property and social justice; while continuing the tradition of mentoring the students I meet each year. Congratulations on 15 years and I look forward to the next 15 and many more! – Tashia Bunch
Student Summary: Music
Summary from a Student: Music Sampling, Fair Use, and Social Justice
- Anthony Williams, rising 2L, Howard University School of Law
This session was a panel discussion with Lita Rosario (President & CEO - WYZ Girl Entertainment Consulting, LLC), Chanelle Hardy (Strategy Partnerships and Outreach – Google), and Dylan Gilbert (Policy Fellow - Public Knowledge); moderated by Kimberly Tignor (Public Policy Director - Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law). Panelists discussed the complicated relationship between music sampling, the Fair Use standard, and how to utilize the Fair Use standard as a tool for Social Justice. Attorney Hardy spoke to the imbalance that people of color face when dealing with copyright law enforcement. Specifically, suits for copyright infringement are brought against people of color at higher rates than their Caucasian counterparts. Additionally, people of color have lower success rates in asserted claims of copyright infringement.
Attorney Gilbert transitioned to how there needs to be legislation outlining a specific Fair Use standard. The Fair Use standard allows an individual to use copyrighted materials as long as it is not a substantial amount and for a transformative purpose. However, courts vary in deciding what qualifies as fair use. There is no law in the United States that expressly dictates how many seconds of a copyrighted sound recording an artist can use. Hip-Hop artists are particularly susceptible to the lack of consistent Fair Use guidelines, as Hip-Hop music relies heavily on music sampling. In response, Attorney Rosario emphasized this point by discussing a technique used a lot in Hip-Hop called looping, in which a composer takes a part of an instrumental and loops it multiple times to create a new sound. Although this technique essentially creates a new composition, nevertheless suits against Hip-Hop artists are initiated at disproportionate rates due to the inconsistency. For example in Bridgeport Music v. Dimension Films, rap group N.W.A was told that a music license was mandatory to use a sample, but in the Salsoul v. Madonna, Pop singer Madonna was allowed to use copyrighted material deemed de minimis or so trivial that it was not a violation of copyright infringement.
In the final segment, Attorney Rosario offered an interesting perspective on advocating for stronger copyright laws and a definitive fair use standard. Attorney Rosario represents some older musicians, whose primary source of income is through music sampling. Without stronger copyright protections these artists are unable to generate income as they are unable to tour or put out new music. Social justice advocacy takes many different forms and it was highly informative to learn about opportunities to advocate in the intellectual property realm.
Student Summary: Tam
Summary from a Student: IIPSJ Roundtable: The Aftermath of In re Tam
- Alexis Harrison, rising 2L, Howard University School of Law
This panel discussion included the following speakers; Phillip Hampton, senior counsel at Haynes & Boone 
LLP; Toni Hickey, Deputy General Counsel & Chief IP Counsel at Cummins, Inc.; William Thomashower, counsel at Pryor Cashman LLP and; Douglas A. Rettew, partner at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. It was moderated by Stephen McJohn, a professor at Suffolk University School of Law. The discussion centered around the implications arising from the holding of In Re Tam. Here the Court reversed its course, holding that it is unconstitutional for the Patent and Trademark Office to deny the registration of disparaging content. Attorney Thomashower compared the effect of the opinion to the opening of the Pandora’s box. He is also concerned that the opinion made no mention of a chilling effect in disallowing disparaging content from being registered, while still permitting its use. Another critique found it unfortunate that the Court also did not mention the level of scrutiny used in the opinion.
Another effect described is the registration of distasteful content in order to limit their use and abuse by other inciting or hateful groups. However, attorney Hickey countered that this would pose a difficult challenge for communities and populations of people that do not have the financial resources to pursue this method of reclaiming distasteful or hateful content. Additionally, attorney Hickey described the impact of the opinion for the average citizen. There is no longer a reliable standard for citizens to consider in determining immoral content.
When asked to consider legislative solutions to the opinion, the panelists concluded that a fix from this branch of government is unlikely and erroneous. Instead, attorney Thomashower described the role of the courts. The objective test should be applied by judges to determine the standard for disparaging content. This is not censorship he argued, because the government has a genuine interest in restricting the registration of content which could lead to a dangerous or inciting result. Nonetheless, attorney Hampton emphasized that the Trademark Office is still pretty conservative, and thus there is an initial layer of bias with the examiners.
MMA
Update on the Passage of the Music Modernization Act
- Idia Egonmwan, a 2L student attorney in the Intellectual Property Clinic at Howard University School of Law.
As many of our membership will recall, earlier this year IIPSJ submitted to Congress both formal comments and also a letter on behalf of intellectual property law and other scholars to support passage of the Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service, and Important Contributions to Society (CLASSICS) Act and the Music Modernization Act (MMA), and otherwise undertook a public campaign in support of these legislative bills. We are pleased to report that these and other grassroots and other efforts were successful and both acts were passed by Congress on September 18, 2018 (combined into a revised Music Modernization Act) and signed into law by President Trump on October 11, 2018.
What is the Music Modernization Act (MMA)?
The MMA mitigates many of the economic and social inequities perpetuated in the music recording business by creating uniformity in legal protection for pre- and post-1972 sound recordings via the federal copyright system.[1] The MMA is broken into three parts:
- Title I establishes a musical licensing collective to issue and administer blanket mechanical licenses for the use of sound recordings to digital music services and to and collect and distribute royalty payments directly to rights owners, including performing artists;
- Title II compensates pre-1972 sound recording artists by creating a royalty structure; and
- Title III creates a legal right for various musical contributors (producers, mixers, and sound engineering) to collect royalties for digital transmissions of sound recordings.[2]
The IP Social Justice Impact of the MMA
African American and other marginalized creators and artists have historically suffered from legal and social limitations upon their freedom to contract, inequities exacerbated by the systemic manipulation and abuse of the copyright law and music sound recording contracts and licensing agreements. “Legacy” recording artists such as Otis Redding, Martha Reeves and the Vandellas, and the Temptations were especially disadvantaged in that copyright protection did not extend to pre-1972 sound recording.[3] As a result of the passage of the MMA, composing artists will benefit from more equitable royalty structures under the Copyright Section 115 compulsory mechanical (recording) license (which historically exploited the inferior bargaining power of all artists, but particularly artists of color) (Title I); limited music copyright protection in the form of a digital performance right has been extended to pre-1972 “Legacy” sound recording artists (Title II); and a right for previously uncompensated producers, mixers, and sound engineers to collect royalties for their creative contributions has been established. (Title III).
Fair Compensation and IP Social Justice for Music Creators and Performers
The Music Modernization Act (MMA) is a progressive step for copyright law and the American recording industry, ultimately providing legacy, current, and future musical artists with more equitable compensation for creating, sharing, and performing their work. Utilizing intellectual property as a means of social justice in the music industry is a small subset of how IP law can be used to empower and rebuild marginalized communities. Although not perfect, the MMA represents the outcomes that can be achieved when legal scholars, legislators, and intellectual property and other social justice activists collaborate to preserve the purpose of copyright and other intellectual property law: to promote and encourage socially equitable and beneficial creative labors.
[1] See the Letter from Lateef Mtima, Dir., Institute for Intellectual Property & Social Justice, to Chuck Grassley, Chairman, U.S. S. Comm. on the Judiciary, Dianne Feinstein, Ranking Member, U.S. S. Comm. on the Judiciary, Bob Goodlatte, Chairman, U.S. House of Rep. Comm. on the Judiciary, Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member, U.S. House of Rep. Comm. on the Judiciary (Mar. 14, 2018)
[2] See Mark Wittow, A Modern Melody for the Music Industry: The Music Modernization Act Just Passed Congress and Awaits Presidential Approval, The Nat’l Law Review (Oct. 2, 2018), https://www.natlawreview.com/article/modern-melody-music-industry-music-modernization-act-just-passed-congress-and-awaits
[3] Id.
In Memoriam Donald Dunner
In Memoriam
Donald R. Dunner: A Leader in Patent Legal Practice and A Champion for IP Social Justice
On October 16, 2019, the legal profession and the IP social justice community lost one of their pillars when Donald R. Dunner, name partner at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, passed away at the age of 88. Donald R. Dunner enjoyed a distinguished legal career and leaves an indelible imprint on contemporary patent law and practice.
One of the most accomplished and influential patent lawyers of his generation, Don Dunner helped to shape the contours of contemporary patent legal practice, not only through his successful representation of a wide array of clients, but also in supporting the progressive evolution of patent law. Under his auspices in 2003, the Finnegan law firm began its collaboration with IIPSJ to establish the nation’s first IP and Social Justice Continuing Legal Program, developed and implemented by Finnegan attorneys Tom Irving and Esther Lim and hosted by the Howard University School of Law. Now in its seventeenth year, the IIPSJ CLE program continues to educate IP attorneys and policy makers from around the nation as to the social justice obligations and opportunities presented by IP protection.
One of the program’s most highly regarded features is the Judicial Roundtable Panel, wherein Don Dunner would moderate an annual open conversation with sitting members of the federal judiciary and explore cutting edge developments in the field of IP law, including important issues which implicate the law’s social justice resonance in the total political economy. Don would often use this opportunity to ask the judges to share guidance for students in the audience seeking clerkships. It was Don Dunner’s stature and reputation in the patent bar that attracted leading jurists to share their insights and perspectives and thereby make the Judicial Roundtable Panel and the IP and Social Justice CLE program a unique and highly respected professional education experience.
While Don Dunner’s practice impacted major issues in patent law, his professional efforts went beyond “top down” approaches to improving the field. A thoughtful and earnest mentor, Don Dunner guided the professional development of many junior attorneys, and along with many of his colleagues at the Finnegan law firm, he was personally engaged in supporting initiatives to enhance racial and gender diversity within the IP bar. Through these efforts many attorneys gained exposure to IP legal practice and the opportunity to participate in IP-oriented internship programs and full-time practice at Finnegan and other IP law firms, and to practice IP law in various corporate in-house counsel and government legal departments.
Donald R. Dunner leaves an impressive legacy in the field of IP legal practice. From his work in various governmental commissions and studies to evaluate and improve the patent system, to his service as president of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, Chair of the American Bar Association’s IP Section, and as a recipient of the AIPLA Board of Director's Excellence Award, Don Dunner contributed much to the profession he cherished. He will be greatly missed by all of us who had the privilege to work with him, even as we continue to appreciate his enduring impact on IP legal doctrine, professional education, and the social justice aspirations of IP protection.
Blog Post On IIPSJ Participates in Event at Copyright Office
IIPSJ Joins Copyright Office to Discuss Social Justice and Empowering Creators of Color to Protect Their Creative Works
by Morgan Sills, Howard University School of Law ’21
On January 15 th the U.S. Copyright Office hosted a panel entitled “Copyright and Social Justice,” as part of its Copyright Matters series. The event explored the intersection of social justice and copyright protection, with a special focus on historically disadvantaged communities that are often unable to access protection for their work.
Opening remarks were given by Hakeem Jeffries, who is a U.S. Representative from New York and a member of the House Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet. Representative Jeffries began the event by stressing the Constitution as the foundation of power for copyright protection and recognizing the emphasis placed on intellectual property rights by the Founding Fathers.
As the first panelist to speak, IIPSJ Founder, Professor Lateef Mtima, set the framework of the discussion by highlighting the social injustice surrounding communities that are unable to use the copyright system to protect their creations. As a result, the copyright system and structure of intellectual property rights as a whole both suffer from the exclusion of their talents and cultural contributions. IIPSJ’s Executive Director, Kim Tignor, reflected on the experiences of hip-hop groups like De La Soul and their noticeable absence from digital streaming services to illustrate the barriers faced by many artists today. She explained that there is a need to “decode” the copyright law so that artists can fairly profit from their efforts; and pointed out how the legal community often fails to educate creators on their ability to use digital space for the fair distribution of their work.
Hollis Wong Wear, a Grammy-nominated singer, songwriter, and producer, presented her perspective as an artist and advocate for other creatives. She voiced the idea that copyright lawyers can learn a great deal from artists and how legal regulations shape their reality, especially with expanded access through social media. She also used the example of Prince and his highly publicized fight against Warner Bros. to gain ownership of his master sound recordings, noting the social and economic impacts of such victories.
Law Professor and Co-Director of the IP Program at George Washington Law, Professor Robert Brauneis reported his findings after conducting research on thirty-five years of registration history. Consistent with the
reports of the previous panelists, Professor Brauneis reported that certain minority groups owned a significantly low number of actual copyright registrations compared to the amount of copyright eligible work they produced. He pointed to the CASE Act as a remedy for this situation, in
addition to the power of copyright attorneys and policy makers to serve creators and educate them on the best tools to benefit from their labor.
Blog Post On Likeness Legislation
Recent Name/Image/Likeness Legislation Will Change the NCAA (or Not)
by Ronald S. Katz
INTRODUCTION
In a list of organizations creating inequities, the National Collegiate Athletic Association would certainly be included. For example, like professional sports, the NCAA is a multi-billion-dollar enterprise, but, unlike professional sports, it pays only a minuscule percentage of its revenues to its athletes, mainly in the form of athletic scholarships. In the field of intellectual property, those players have not been allowed to receive payments for their names, images and likenesses, even though every other student on campus has that right.
To remedy this latter injustice, California in September 2019 passed the Fair Pay to Play Act, allowing athletes rights regarding their names, images and likenesses similar to those enjoyed by all other students. Numerous other states are considering NIL legislation similar to California’s.
Because college sports receive much public attention, the California law, which does not come into effect until 2023, has generated numerous opinions about its potential effect. The extremes of those opinions range from those who say that the law will end intercollegiate sport as we know it to those who say that the law will have no effect. The NCAA has now also weighed in, stating, opaquely, that it will at some unknown point “permit” college athletes “the opportunity to benefit” from their name/image/likeness “in a manner consistent with the collegiate model.”
In fact, at this juncture, no one can really say what the effect, if any, of the law will be. That point was driven home by an order rendered on January 6, 2020, by the federal appellate court with jurisdiction over California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Pursuant to that order, in the pending appeal (No. 19-15566) of In re: National Collegiate Athletic Association Athletic Grant-in-Aid Cap Antitrust Litigation, a case concerning the payment of college athletes, “The parties are directed to file…briefs…on the impact, if any, of California’s Fair Pay to Play Act…on this case.”
If the judges of the Ninth Circuit do not yet know the effect of the NIL law, it is fair to say that no one else does either. In my opinion, the best that can be done at this point, as below, is to put the law into context by triangulating among the extreme opinions noted above and the NCAA’s position on the Fair Pay to Play Act.
EXTREME OPINION #1: NIL LEGISLATION WILL END INTERCOLLEGIATE SPORT AS WE KNOW IT
There is logic supporting this view. For example, there is no difference in economic effect if an athlete receives from an alumni booster of a university $10,000 under the table, which violates NCAA rules; $10,000 in salary, which violates NCAA rules; or $10,000 for name, image or likeness, which would be legal under the Fair Pay to Play Act and, possibly, under new NCAA regulations. Because money is fungible, it really does not matter, in an economic sense, for what reason it is purportedly paid. Therefore, payment for names, images and/or likenesses can completely undermine the NCAA principle that athletes should not be paid. The amounts paid, in theory, could be virtually unlimited.
EXTREME OPINION #2: NIL LEGISLATION WILL HAVE NO EFFECT
This extreme view has support in the law. Under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, states cannot make laws that regulate interstate commerce, and intercollegiate sports clearly constitute interstate commerce, viz., the NATIONAL Collegiate Athletic Association. Indeed, a case decided by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1993 (NCAA v. Miller, 10 F.3d 633) applied this principle to intercollegiate sports.
In that case, Nevada made a law that would have caused NCAA disciplinary proceedings to have rules in Nevada different from those that the NCAA applied nationally. Like the Fair Pay to Play Act, the Nevada law had been emulated in other states.
The court did not hesitate to invalidate the Nevada statute on the ground that it regulated interstate commerce in violation of the U.S. Constitution: “The statute directly regulates interstate commerce and runs afoul of the Commerce Clause both because it regulates a product in interstate commerce beyond Nevada’s state boundaries, and because it puts the NCAA…in jeopardy of being subjected to inconsistent legislation arising from the injection of Nevada’s regulatory scheme into the jurisdiction of other states.” It is difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish the judicial reasoning applied to this Nevada legislation from the judicial reasoning that would be applied to California’s Fair Pay to Play Act.
THE NCAA’S OPAQUE PRONOUNCEMENT
As noted above, in October, 2019, after the California law passed, the NCAA issued a vague statement to the effect that It will study how college athletes may be paid for their names, images and/or likenesses “in a manner consistent with the collegiate model” at some unstated point in time. One problem with the NCAA’s statement is that the collegiate model is nowhere clearly defined.
Underscoring that fundamental problem is that the District Court decision being considered in the Ninth Circuit order mentioned above (In re Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n Athletic Grant-in Aid Cap Antitrust Litig., No. 14-MD-02541 CW, 2019 WL 1747780, (N.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2019)) concluded that the NCAA rules “that permit, limit, or forbid student-athlete compensation and benefits do not follow any coherent definition of amateurism,” which is the core principle of the NCAA. This finding was based, among other things, on inconsistent definitions of amateurism given by different NCAA witnesses and on the fact that at trial, according to the court’s opinion, there was evidence of seventeen different ways-such as payment for post season bowl or championship play–that the NCAA permits athletes to be compensated.
Thus, whatever the NCAA’s definition of an amateur is, it does not comport with the dictionary definition: “a person who engages in a study, sport or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons.” Given the above, it is difficult to divine how the NCAA will create a system of payment for athlete names, images and likenesses “consistent with the collegiate model.” It should be noted that payment for the names, images and/or likenesses of athletes rarely have a connection to education.
CONCLUSION
Intellectual property injustice is a symptom of the NCAA’s underlying problem, and the Fair Pay to Play Act is a reaction to that symptom. The fundamental problem of the NCAA is that its top levels are indistinguishable from professional sports, and the theory of amateurism-however that is defined–does not work in that context. Whether the Fair Pay to Play Act survives or not, the pressure will continue to bring the regulation of college sport in line with its reality.
Ronald S. Katz is a Senior Counsel at GCA Law Partners LLP. A co-author of Sport, Ethics and Leadership, he will be speaking on the subject covered above at the 2020 IP and Social Justice CLE this coming February 28.
Blog Post On 17th Annual IIPSJ CLE Conference
17th Annual IP & Social Justice CLE Seminar
by Tashia Bunch, CLE Co-Chair
Thank you to all that participated in the 17th annual IP and Social Justice CLE program. Our program is the longest running IP and social justice CLE program in the country. We work hard to start conversations surrounding diversity in IP and to help ensure these conversations continue to take place. And our conversations aren’t just theoretical, we focus on real world solutions for increasing awareness of social justice issues and diversity in the field of IP. We focus on diversity in several ways; diversity of our CLE panelists, diversity of attendees, and discussions of how IP ownership impacts diverse communities.
Diversity of our CLE panelists: Every year we feature Howard Law alumni on our panels and we attempt to include someone from a minority group on every panel. This year all but two sessions included a minority speaker.
Diversity of attendees: Each year we attract a highly diverse audience to attend our program. This year, the program was held at Howard University School of Law attracting students and alum of the prestigious HBCU (Historically Black Colleges and Universities). Additionally, we offer a discounted rate for alumni of Howard Law and next year we expect to expand that discount to attendees that are alumni of any HBCU in the nation.
Discussions of impact of IP on diverse communities: Every year, we ask all of our speakers to be sure that they discuss the social justice implications of the topic they are covering at our program. We also host a social justice luncheon which annually features one or two discussions of IP rights and social justice.
This year, we had sessions featuring discussions on ways to increase diversity in the IP bar, including federal judges offering career and practice tips to Howard Law students in attendance to increase the pipeline into the profession to in house counsel discussing ways to increase diversity and inclusion at their own companies and within the law firms they work with.
This year’s social justice luncheon featured two topics. The first was a discussion of the recently passed California Pay to Play Act and the fairness of allowing student athletes to be compensated for use of their name, image, or likeness and what this law and others like it that are being circulated in state legislatures around the country could mean for student athletes. The second panel “Remembering Invention of a Slave: Patents and the Continuing Struggle for Civil Rights” discussed inventorship and the struggle to acquire patents in the African American community.
If you weren’t able to attend this year, you missed a day of lively and engaging discussions. We hope that you will consider joining us next year. Thanks to one of our sponsors, Microsoft, we were able to record several of the CLE sessions this year. We plan to share some of these videos with you throughout the year to encourage you all to engage in these conversations.
Please save the date for next year’s conference – Friday, March 5, 2021
Tashia is a 2006 graduate of Howard University School of Law, which is how she first learned about IIPSJ. She currently works as a Legal Policy Attorney in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Previous positions at the USPTO included serving as the Acting Trademarks Chief of Staff and as a trademark examining attorney.
Blog Post IP Attorney Interviews
Interviews with Attorneys of Color in IP
In 2020, spring and summer protests of racial injustice and mistreatment by police increased momentum to a movement to support diversity and inclusion in a variety of spaces, including in the legal field. Our work at the Institute has always included efforts to increase the diversity of the intellectual property legal bar. In 2003 the Institute established its annual IP and Social Justice CLE program, in part to provide opportunities for IP attorneys of color to present their expertise before IP experts in in-house corporate and governmental legal departments, elite law firms, and other IP entities. For the past seventeen years, this program has also enabled minority IP attorneys to serve as role models for dozens of law students and to encourage them to pursue careers in IP practice.
We believe the lack of diversity in the IP legal bar must be addressed in a variety of ways. We previously shared the Bloomberg Law article, Black IP Lawyers Who’ve Made It Look to Grow Ranks Beyond 1.7%. Now we build on that conversation starter with interviews with successful IP attorneys of color to hear their honest perspective:
- Mariessa Terrell
- Daryl Lim
- Jennifer Hayes
- Lita Rosario-Richardson
- Philip G. Hampton
- Idris N. McKelvey
Mariessa Terrell
This month we feature an interview with Mariessa Terrell.
Watch the full interview here.
With evolving definitions on what intellectual property includes and rapidly emerging technology, trademark and fashion attorney Mariessa Terrell discusses the unconventional career pathways taken that launched her to the forefront of a landscape shift in intellectual property law.
From her beginnings as a student at Howard University School of Law, Mariessa found a way to incorporate her love of fashion into her journey. Landing at the United States Patent and Trademark Office(USPTO) in the department responsible for beauty fashion matters was just the beginning. Since then, she has gone on to develop specialized practice areas at her law firm, served as D.C. Fashion Commissioner, and assumed the role of Adjunct Professor & Supervising Attorney of the Howard University School of Law Intellectual Property Law Clinic. She details that staying focused on what she wanted helped navigate her through her unique route to success.
After an extended hiatus, Mariessa made her way back to the USPTO office where she is the Attorney Advisor to the Trademarks Customer Outreach section where she develops the USPTO educational programs for experienced trademark practitioners. She also is Executive Director of the High Tea Society, a mentoring program for girls in Washington, D.C., and a creative writer with several published short stories featuring her alter ego, Simone Butterfly.
Contact Mariessa:
Web: MariessaTerrell.com
Social Media: @MariessaTerrellEsq
Email: M@MariessaTerrell.com
This interview was conducted by Leeandria Williams, a law student at Thurgood Marshall School of Law.
Daryl Lim
This month we feature an interview with Professor Daryl Lim.
Watch the full interview here.
Professor Daryl Lim is a very busy man. He is the H. Laddie Montague Jr. Chair at Penn State Dickinson Law, associate dean for Research and Innovation, and the founding director of Dickinson’s IP and Innovative Initiative. Incredibly, Professor Lim is also a co-hire in Penn State’s Department of Computational and Data Sciences, and an affiliate at Penn State’s Center for Socially Responsible Artificial Intelligence.
Truly IP’s international man of mystery, Professor Lim is an alumnus of the University of Singapore, the University of London (London School of Economics), and Stanford University. In addition to his professorial duties, he serves as a peer reviewer for several leading law journals as he is himself an award-winning author on the intersection of IP, technology, competition policy, and the public good.
During the interview, Professor Lim tackles the hard-hitting questions, including whether the practice of law as we know it will survive the current influx of generative AI chatbot programs, like “ChatGPT.” Thankfully, Professor Lim assures us that future lawyers who possess distinctly human characteristics–such as empathy, creativity, and a passion for social justice–will always be able to add value.
This interview was conducted by Liana Alston, a third-year law student at Howard University School of Law.
Jennifer Hayes
This month we feature an interview with Jennifer Hayes.
Watch the full interview here.
In this interview Jennifer Hayes, head of Jordan IP Law’s Pharmaceutical, Biotechnological, Life Sciences, and Chemical and Materials Practice groups gives her perspective on diversity in the legal profession and the importance of mentorship. Early in her career, Jennifer followed in her father’s footsteps and became a registered pharmacist in the state of Maryland. Later, her mother encouraged her to seek out a career in patent law.
This interview was conducted by Erin Williamson, a third year law student at The George Washington University Law School. in the interview, Jennifer stresses the importance of “not taking no for an answer” and diligently pursuing opportunities to grow in one’s practice. In the interview, Jennifer talks about her experiences building Jordan IP’s chemical practice from the ground up and the challenge of bringing in new clients. Throughout the interview is one consistent theme: understand your strengths and never stop seeking opportunities to improve yourself.
Lita Rosario-Richardson
This month we feature an interview with Lita Rosario-Richardson.
Watch the full interview here.
Lita Rosario-Richardson runs WYZ Girl Entertainment Consulting, where she provides legal advice and advocacy for creators relating to intellectual property and entertainment issues. Early in her career, Mrs. Rosario-Richardson founded and was the VP of Business and Legal Affairs for University Music Group which produced multi-platinum artists Dru Hill, Sisqo, and MYA. She has represented numerous artists, including George Clinton, Missy Elliot, members of Parliament Funkadelic, Afrika Bambaataa, and Soul Sonic Force to name just a few. She is also an adjunct professor at the University of the District of Columbia’s Department of Mass Media, Visual, and Performing Arts and American University’s Kogod School of Business.
Philip G. Hampton
This month we feature an interview with Philip G. Hampton.
Watch the full interview here.
The interview was conducted by Elizabeth Rice, a third year law student at Howard University School of Law. In this interview, Chief Diversity & Inclusion Officer, Senior Partner and former Commissioner for Trademarks Phillip Hampton provides his perspective on diversity, the importance of mentorship, and success within the legal profession. Outside of his aforementioned experience, he is also an adjunct professor at Howard University School of Law and was recently awarded the 2021 Mark T. Banner Award, among many other recognitions and accomplishments.
Throughout the interview Hampton emphasizes the need to increase the presence of women and minorities in the legal profession, especially in the areas of patent and copyright law. He makes mentions of his own efforts in his former position as Commissioner for Trademarks to do just that. He attributes his personal success to his persistence and sometimes, admittedly, his stubbornness. In the interview, Hampton talks about his experiences early on in his career and how those challenges encouraged him to persist and work harder. While a broad range of topics and anecdotes are covered, a consistent theme is Hampton’s dedication and commitment to helping others achieve success in the legal profession.
Idris N. McKelvey
In December 2020, we featured an interview of Idris N. McKelvey.
Idris McKelvey leads the Estée Lauder Companies’ Patent Group, where he is responsible for designing and executing the company’s global patent strategy, supporting more than 30 luxury cosmetics brands. Idris was promoted to Vice President, and Lead Patent Counsel, in July of 2018.
Prior to Estée Lauder, Idris served as patent counsel for Procter and Gamble, managing global patent portfolios for brands including Pantene®, Head and Shoulders®, Herbal Essences®, Cascade®, and Dawn®.
Idris earned his J.D. from Howard University School of Law in 2005, and his B.S. in chemistry from Howard University in 2002 (cum laude). Away from work, Idris volunteers with the Long Island chapter of Girls Inc. and Jack and Jill of America. Idris resides in Huntington, NY with his wife, Monique, and two daughters, Nadia and Zara.
The interview was conducted by LaTessa Gray*, a third year law student at Howard University School of Law. In the interview, Mr. McKelvey discusses his career as a patent attorney, provides advice for future IP attorneys, and discusses the diversity, or lack of diversity, of the IP bar.
Here’s a description of the interview in Tessa’s own words.
Vice President, Lead Patent Counsel of Estee Lauder, and full-time “girl dad” Idris McKelvey is nothing short of inspiring. In this interview, McKelvey gives his perspectives on the lack of diversity in the legal profession, how to distinguish yourself amongst legal talent, and the importance of accepting and seeking honest critique in career development. He also negotiates a frozen yogurt date with one of his daughters.
McKelvey details an insightful approach to his philosophy of success which includes falling into opportunities, self-accountability and awareness, and fostering intellectual curiosity. But this is not all talk. His commitment to the skills he believes were useful in his journey is evidenced by his own hobbies and interests: listening to a variety of music, travelling the world with his wife and daughters [which has been on a halt with the virus], and reading books that push him to think and approach the world differently. Many years removed from his days as a chemistry major at Howard University, McKelvey still makes an effort to learn from the world around him and to use those teachings as a tool to differentiate himself within the legal field.
Blog Post On NIL and Antitrust
NCAA’s Proposed NIL Regulations Are an Antitrust Violation Waiting to Happen
by Ronald S. Katz
The NCAA is no stranger to antitrust violations. Defendant in a landmark U.S. Supreme Court antitrust case in 1984, the NCAA has been on the wrong side of two Ninth Circuit decisions in the past five years (a blink of the eye in antitrust time). That record of recidivism, however, has not stopped the NCAA from, once again, ignoring the free market and proposing new regulations (“Proposal”) on the sale of the names, images and likenesses of college athletes. The Proposal, not surprisingly, runs afoul of those earlier court decisions.
Names, images and likenesses have been sold since time immemorial in a free market. Of course, in a free market, these transactions are confidential. How much someone is being paid for a name, image or likeness is clearly competitively sensitive information.
Such confidentiality will not exist in the contracts of college athletes, however. According to the NCAA’s October 14, 2020 press release on the Proposal, “student-athletes would be required to disclose name, image and likeness activities including compensation arrangements and details of relationships developed through the process.” Such disclosures would be made to what the press release calls “a third-party administrator.”
Also, a free market enables competitors to deal with whom they please. According to the press release, however, there will be significant restrictions on the college athletes. First, they cannot “particpate in activities involving a commercial product or service that conflicts with NCAA legislation (such as sports wagering or banned substances) … ” However, sports betting and so-called banned substances like cannabis are, of course, legal in many states.
More ominously, according to the press release, “schools would have the opportunity to prohibit activities that conflict with school values or existing sponsorship arrangements.” Because many of the schools have sponsorship arrangements with major sports equipment/apparel companies like Nike and Adidas, this is a significant curtailment of competition. As for “school values,” this hopelessly vague phrase has the potential of blotting out all NIL activity by college athletes.
Measuring the Proposal against the major antitrust cases lost by the NCAA paints a clear picture of antitrust violations on the horizon. The 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case, for example, NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), involved the NCAA’s policy of curtailing the number of football games a school could televise, much as the Proposal curtails the quantity of names, images and likenesses that a college athlete can sell.
The Supreme Court’s holding was foursquare against the NCAA: “that the record supports the District Court’s conclusion that, by curtailing output and blunting the ability of member institutions to respond to consumer preference, the NCAA has restricted, rather than enhanced, the place of intercollegiate athletics in the Nation’s life. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals [against the NCAA] is Affirmed.”
The Proposal does not fare any better under the 2015 Ninth Circuit case, 0 ‘Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, 802 F.3d 1049 (20!5). That case involved paying athletes for their names, images and likenesses, which was completely forbidden at that time.
The Ninth Circuit held that higher educational institutions were prohibited from preventing such payments up to the cost of attendance at an institution of higher education: “In this case, the NCAA’s rules have been more restrictive than necessary to maintain its tradition of amateurism in support of the college sports market. The Rule of Reason [of the Sherman Antitrust Act] requires that the NCAA permit its schools to provide up to the cost of attendance to their student athletes.”
The Proposal also does not meet the standards of the 2020 Ninth Circuit case, In re National Collegiate Athletic Association Athletic Grant-in-Aid Cap Antitrust Litigation, No. 19-15566 (May 18, 2020). That case involved paying athletes for education-related expenses. The Ninth Circuit opinion prohibited the NCAA member schools “from enforcing rules that restrict the education-related expenses that its member institutions may offer students who play Football Bowl Subdivision football and Division I basketball.” Again, the Ninth Circuit’s holding was crystal clear: “the district court properly concluded that NCAA limits on education-related benefits do not ‘play by the Sherman Act’s rules.”‘
Based on the above, the Proposal, if it is enacted by the NCAA, will violate the antitrust laws. As Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut was quoted in the November 14, 2020 issue of USA Today, the Proposal was “functionally useless” and “will do little to change the current exploitive state of college athletics.”
Ron Katz is a Senior Counsel at GCA Law Partners LLP in Mountain View, California. A co-author of the textbook Sport, Ethics and Leadership (Routledge, 2017), he will be speaking on the subject covered above at the 2021 IP and Social Justice CLE this coming March 5.
For more on this topic, check out these posts:
Recent Name/Image/Likeness Legislation Will Change the NCAA (or Not)
The California Fair Pay to Play Act- Finally IP Social Justice for Student Athletes
Blog Post Status Update on Student Athlete NIL Legislation
Status Update on Student Athlete NIL Legislation
by Cole Baker
Name, image, and likeness (NIL) legislation takes effect in 7 states throughout July. These states (Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, and New Mexico) are part of a nationwide push by state legislatures to enact laws that allow for collegiate student-athletes to profit off their NIL. 39 states have introduced bills to their legislatures, and 16 states have officially signed NIL legislation into law.
How We Got Here
In September 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsome (CA) signed into law California’s Fair Pay to Play Act making it unlawful for universities to revoke a student-athlete’s scholarship for receiving compensation from use of his or her NIL in a commercial nature.¹ After numerous states followed suit by enacting similar legislation, the NCAA Board of Governors released a statement indicating that it would look to “modernize” its rules and add “flexibility” to its policy of banning any monetization of NIL by participating student-athletes.² After months of deliberation and direction to each subdivision of competition to discuss changes to its policy, the NCAA released another statement in April 2020 indicating that it is supportive of allowing athletes to sign endorsement contracts and appear in advertisements.³ The NCAA received draft legislation from each of its 3 subdivisions for updates to NIL policy in November of 2020.4
The NCAA has repeatedly called on Congress to enact federal legislation to both standardize NIL policy on a national scale and carve out an antitrust exemption for the NCAA to allow caps on NIL compensation earned by its athletes.5 So far there have been 8 bills introduced to Congress dealing with the issue. The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing on June 9th to receive testimony on the issue of NIL for collegiate athletes, how a national policy would benefit consistency and fairness of its implementation both for institutions and athletes, and the competing interests at state between the NCAA, its member-institutions, and athletes. Senators Booker and Blumenthal stressed the importance of health-care related legislation being included in the prospective bill and championed their Athlete Bill of Rights. Mark Few, head coach of the Gonzaga men’s basketball team testified indicating it is embarrassing that nothing has been done thus far with respect to creating avenues for athletes to exploit their NIL rights. Mark Emmert, president of the NCAA, also testified urging the Senate Committee to consider five policy matters included in any NIL bill: (1) the bill put in place a unified national NIL model, (2) the bill support Title IX considerations, (3) the national policy expressly preempts state NIL law, (4) the bill safeguard the non-employee status of student athletes, and (5) the bill create legal exemptions for the NCAA and its member-institutions to antitrust concerns. Emmert received push back on the latter two recommendations from testifying witnesses and senators alike. Senator Cantwell, chair of the committee, concluded the hearing by indicating that due to the fact that more than half of the senate-committee members testified, the Commerce Committee is committed to get something done in regards to national NIL policy.
The NCAA has also received federal attention from the Department of Justice’s antitrust division, which undertook meetings and corresponded with NCAA officials regarding the policy reforms.6 The DOJ has expressed it’s wariness of the NCAA policies as violating antitrust laws. It has specifically taken issue with the antitrust concerns arising out of the NCAA’s purported 3rd-party “clearinghouse” agency proposal. The policy proposal indicates athletes would be forced to disclose NIL earnings to ensure compliance with a capped sum. The sum would be dictated by the NCAA’s determination of what represents a “fair-market value” for NIL.7 Furthermore, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Alston v. NCAA. While not dealing directly with NIL, it is an antitrust suit which may answer the question of whether the NCAA model is truly one of amateurism in a decision likely to be released this month.8 To learn more about the case, NPR recently looked into it in their Planet Money podcast.
A Summer of Change
So far, 39 states have introduced bills relating to student-athlete NIL compensation within their legislatures, and 16 of those states have signed these policies into law.9 The NCAA Division 1 council is expected to act on proposed policies on June 23, 2021.10 On July 1, 2021, NIL laws take effect in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska (pending individual school adoption) and New Mexico; Arizona’s laws will take effect on July 23.
These state laws differ in scope. Some are less restrictive than the proposed NCAA policies, whereas others are more restrictive. For example, Mississippi’s law permits schools to prohibit athletes from wearing any clothes with a sponsoring-entity’s logo or insignia at any school-sponsored event, whereas the NCAA policy would regulate the appearance of athlete sponsors’ logos only during pre- and post-game activities.11 Furthermore, Mississippi prohibits athletes from receiving NIL compensation prior to enrollment in their first college class, whereas the current NCAA policy would allow for high school students to seek NIL compensation as early as their 9th grade year.12 On the other hand, New Mexico has some of the most lenient rules pertaining to NIL compensation. The state prohibits schools from terminating an athlete’s eligibility to participate or receive scholarships regarding any “food, shelter, medical expenses or insurance from a third party.” The state further prohibits schools from interfering with a student-athlete’s choice of footwear during any mandatory team activity.13
There are many questions left unanswered without a national policy in place from the NCAA or Congress. Will athlete’s still be subject to exploitation of their schools when most of the state laws leave determining acceptable commercial conduct up to the school’s own internal policy? How will school’s handle licensing issues where athletes appear in advertisements or promotions with their logos and insignia? Will athlete’s have their NIL earnings be capped or confined to monetary compensation, and is that even lawful under antitrust laws? Nevertheless, athletes in these seven states may be able to sign endorsement deals in July so long as they are compliant with state law. However, it is expected that the NCAA will file suit against these states if they do not come up with a national policy plan beforehand.14 Regardless, this summer marks the start of a new era of collegiate athletics which will undoubtedly change the landscape of sport for athletes who have for decades had their talents and work exploited by the NCAA model.
¹ CAL. EDUC. CODE §§ 67456-57 (2019).
² Board of Governors starts process to enhance name, image and likeness opportunities, NCAA (October 29, 2019).
³ Dan Murphy, NCAA group supports player endorsement plan, ESPN (April 29, 2020).
4 Taking Action–Name, Image, and Likeness, NCAA (2021).
5 Murphy, supra note 3.
6 Steve Berkowitz et. al., DOJ critical of NCAA’s view of antitrust compliance; association president Mark Emmert wants voting delay on rules proposals, USA Today (January 9, 2021).
7 Id.
8 Dan Murphy, Everything you need to know about the NCAA’s NIL debate, ESPN (May 24, 2021).
9 Tracker: Name, Image and Likeness Legislation by State, Business of College Sports (June 2, 2021).
10 Murphy, supra note 8.
11 Steve Berkowitz, Name, image and likeness laws vary by state. A closer look at those going into effect July 1., USA Today (May 28, 2021).
12 Id.
13 Id.
14 Murphy, supra note 8.
Cole Baker is a summer intern with IIPSJ. He is a rising 2L at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law.
For more on this topic, check out these posts:
Video: Right of Publicity Update
NCAA’s Proposed NIL Regulations Are an Antitrust Violation Waiting to Happen
Recent Name/Image/Likeness Legislation Will Change the NCAA (or Not)
The California Fair Pay to Play Act- Finally IP Social Justice for Student Athletes
Blog Post TPAC/PPAC Nominations
USPTO Seeking Nominations for Vacancies on the TPAC and PPAC
by Delaney Halvey
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is seeking nominations to fill upcoming vacancies on the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC) and Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC.)[1] TPAC and PPAC committee members are responsible for representing the diverse interests of the users of the USPTO with respect to trademarks and patents. Some of their recent work included in the TPAC and PPAC 2020 Annual Reports includes: a TPAC commendation of Trademark Operations during the COVID-19 pandemic, including modernization of IT products and adaption to teleworking; formation of a PPAC AI Subcommittee to provide guidance to USPTO leadership; TPAC review of the TTAB expedited cancellation pilot program aimed at “decluttering” the Trademark Register; and PPAC oversight of a Congress-driven effort to diversify inventorship.[2]
As these projects highlight, the members of these committees have an important and influential role in USPTO operations. They keep the USPTO accountable to their goals, both self-generated and passed down from Congress, while also providing input into future goals. Because there are several degrees of separation between the operations of the USPTO and the votes of stakeholders, the committees remind USPTO leadership of these stakeholders’ interests. Examples of this middleman role include public meetings, which provide a public forum for interested parties to air their opinions, and fee setting hearings, which allow for stakeholder testimony.
For the committees to be effective representatives of the community who uses the USPTO system, it is vital that their membership reflect the diversity of this community. Federal law requires each member to have a “substantial background and achievement in finance, management, labor relations, science, technology, and office automation,”[3] and provides only that small and large entity applicants must be represented.[4] Perhaps as is to be expected, the committees have been historically biased in memberships towards representatives of large entity applicants. Aside from the size of the entity applicant, other diversities the committee membership would benefit from reflecting include: the racial and cultural background of applicants, the industry of applicants, the gender identity of applicants, and the geographic location of applicants.
Nominations must be submitted electronically by completing the corresponding Public Advisory Committee application: https://tinyurl.com/ynae4a67 for the Patent Public Advisory Committee, or https://tinyurl.com/hcux6462 for the Trademark Public Advisory Committee. These applications ask for detailed contact information for both the nominating and nominated party, as well as information regarding publications, awards, credentials, and details about the organization represented by the nominated party. Nominations will be accepted on or before July 9, 2021.
[1] https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-seeks-nominations-patent-and-trademark-public-advisory-committees
[2] https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/TPAC_2020_Annual_Report.pdf & https://uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PPAC_2020_Annual_Report.pdf
[3] 35 U.S.C. 5(b)(3)
[4] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/25/2021-11047/patent-and-trademark-public-advisory-committees
Delaney Halvey is a summer intern with IIPSJ. She is a rising second semester 3L at Georgetown University Law Center (graduating in December 2021.)
Blog Post 2021 Summer Interns
Meet Our 2021 Summer Interns
Cole Baker is a rising 2L at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law. He is originally from Denver, Colorado. Cole graduated cum laude from the University of Delaware in the spring of 2020 where he played on the Division One men’s lacrosse team and double majored in Political Science and Economics. There, Cole was the chair of the men’s lacrosse team’s “Academic Weapons Committee,” an academic tutor for Political Science, Economics, and Science courses, and was a member of the Horn Center for Entrepreneurship. At Carey Law, Cole is a member of the National Trial Team which participates in mock trial competitions throughout the nation.
Erin Williamson is a rising third-year law student at The George Washington University Law School where she is concentrating her studies in intellectual property. Her interest in intellectual property began during her time as an undergraduate at Drexel University studying Music Industry Business. Erin aspires to pursue a career in copyrights and trademarks to advocate for the rights of creators. When she is not busy studying, she enjoys weightlifting and discovering new music for her ever growing Spotify library.
Delaney Halvey is a rising second semester 3L at Georgetown University Law Center (graduating in December 2021.) Delaney grew up in Tucson, Arizona, where she enjoyed hiking, camping, trail running, and mountain biking. In 2018, Delaney graduated from Texas A&M University with a degree in industrial engineering and minors in cybersecurity and math. As a college student, she knew she wanted to attend law school and was able to shadow several members of Raytheon’s legal department when she worked there as an engineering intern. As a law student, Delaney has worked in D.C.’s Landlord Tenant Resource Center, as a Research Assistant and Teaching Assistant at Georgetown, as an intern for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management Inspector General, and in her personal favorite job as a tennis coach at Brentwood Elementary. Delaney am excited for the opportunity to now be working for IIPSJ, and is looking forward to everything she will learn this summer.
Sara Griffiths was born and raised in Kingston, Jamaica. After relocating to the United States for high school she went on to graduate magna cum laude from Miami-Dade College and thereafter transferred to American University and completed her education at the School of International Service. While there she earned a bachelor’s degree in International Studies with concentrations in Identity, Race, Gender and Culture and Peace, Global Security and Conflict Resolution with a regional focus in Latin America and the Caribbean. She is presently a law student at Georgetown University Law Center where she participates in both the Global Law Scholars and Human Rights Associates Program. She has interned at the Jamaican Court of Appeal, the 39th regional Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Heads of State Conference, and the Embassy of Jamaica at Mexico. She has particular interests in international human rights and public international law and intersectional and critical race theory and is fluent in English as well as Patois—the Jamaican Creole dialect.
Blog Post: 2022 HBCU Summer Interns join IIPSJ
2022 Summer Interns
Phoebe Ogunwobi is a rising 2L at North Carolina Central School of Law. Phoebe was born and raised in London, United Kingdom. She has a MPS in Paralegal studies from The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. and a BA in Political Science from The University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Before attending law school Phoebe worked in both law and technology fields and hopes to continue to strengthen her interests in Intellectual Property and International Law.
Leandre’a Scott is a rising second-year student at North Carolina University School of Law. Leandre’a graduated from East Carolina University with a Bachelor of Science in Biology. She has an interest in Intellectual Property law and aims to complete a patent clinic in the fall. Leandre’a strives to be a powerful force in anything she does and enjoys learning new things and then utilizing that knowledge for the better. Leandre’a is excited to continue to learn and grow within the IP community.
Leeandria Williams is an evening student at Southern University Law Center where she is a member of the Intellectual Property Law Association and the Fashion Law Society. She currently works in the client development department at Akerman LLP as a Senior Communications Specialist. A native of Houston, Texas, she received her undergraduate degree in journalism from Howard University in 2012. Outside of her professional and educational duties, she is an active member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated and volunteers at various community events. She also proudly represents her hometown as the reigning Ms. Black Houston USA 2022.
2023 HBCU IP & Tech Law Summit Recap
On March 2, 2023, IIPSJ, co-host Perkins Coie, and several sponsors, hosted the 5th Annual Microsoft Technology Summit to provide a comprehensive “diversity pipeline” experience for law students. During the Technology Summit, law students learned about new opportunities in intellectual property(IP) and technology law and policy practice.
Acting Principal Deputy National Cyber Director of the Office of the National Cyber Director Kemba Eneas Walden delivered the keynote speech to attendees alongside Founder of the HBCU IP & Tech Law Summit Charlie Bingham for a fireside chat. Acting Director Walden recounted her journey to her current role as a Hampton University graduate and addressed issues of cybersecurity that her office plans to handle as a result of President Joe Biden’s newest initiative.
The Summit consists of two key components: a full day of student-focused IP and technology law updates with networking and recognition of student academic and extracurricular achievement in these fields, including the presentation of “micro” scholarship awards paid directly to students. This year, the following were recipients of awards:
- D&I in Tech Ally Award
- Cameron Benton, NCCU
- Tech Law Policy Achievement Award
- Kayla Mitchell, 3L NCCU
- Samuel Cadet, HUSL
- Outstanding Achievement in IP Social Justice Award
- Daria Fogan, HUSL
- DeNashia Robinson, HUSL
- Brianna George, NCCU
- The IP & Tech Law Summit IP Social Engineer Award
- Michee Jacobs, HUSL
- Askhari Little, HUSL
- Tyrrell Ufot, NCCU
- The IP & Tech Law Summit IP Achievement Award
- Leandre’a Scott, NCCU
While the Summit was initially established for Howard Law students, it has since been expanded to include students at four historically black colleges and university law schools. In 2022 a pilot initiative was added to expand the scope of the program to assist students in finding internship opportunities in IP practice, and to provide internship stipends where the internships secured are uncompensated.
Some of the subjects covered during the event included data privacy, cryptocurrency, and blockchain and were presented by experts in the intellectual property field including executives from Uber, Perkins Cole, and Reed Smith hosting sessions such as:
- The Impact of Innovative Technologies on Society and the Practice of Law
- The Impact of Cryptocurrency and Blockchain on Society and the Practice of Law
- Paying it Forward: A Day in the Life of a Tech Lawyer
Find the full list of videos here.
Thank you to our sponsors!
2023 IP & Social Justice CLE Recap
“IIPSJ’s annual conferences played an important role in developing a social justice perspective in intellectual property law and policy. The Institute’s mission is a vital one”- Honorable Raymond T. Chen
These were some of the key reflections to come out of the 20th Annual Intellectual Property and Social Justice CLE Conference, held on March 3, 2023. The event marked more than two decades of increasing the education surrounding the nexus of intellectual property and social justice as well as broadening the knowledge of intellectual property practitioners across the globe.
As part of the 20th anniversary, we celebrated the program and Institute founders with awards. IP Social Justice Lifetime Achievement Awards were given to Thomas L. Irving and Steven D. Jamar.
And we honored Professor Lateef Mtima with an award as well that read:
Presented to Lateef Mtima 
In recognition of your unwavering commitment to increasing diversity in intellectual property law and guiding the next generation of attorneys especially those from historically black colleges and universities
In appreciation of your contributions to the field of intellectual property law through your superior and thought-provoking authorship on the topic of intellectual property and social justice
In acknowledgement of your ongoing service to the intellectual property legal community through your teachings as a renowned lecturer and leadership as founder of the Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice.
For the CLE program, key attendee sessions included our annual IP Year in Review, social justice luncheon sessions: Unleashing American Innovation Act and Highlights from the Innovator Diversity Pilots Conference, as well as the annual Donald R. Dunner Judicial Panel, 
which included insights and reflections from the Honorable Leonard P. Stark, Judge with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Honorable Scott R. Boalick, Chief Administrative Patent Judge with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the Honorable Bryan F. Moore, Administrative Law Judge with the United States International Trade Commission, and the Honorable Susan G. Braden, Former Chief Judge (ret.) with the United States Court of Federal Claims.
The IP and Social Justice CLE Conference benefits from participation from all demographics within the IP legal community: attorneys in private practice, in-house counsel corporate departments, government agencies, and public interest NGOs, as well as members of the judiciary and government officials. In addition to the keynote sessions, this year’s breakout sessions included networking and discussions with counsel from Meta, Under Armour, J.P. Morgan, 3M Company, Freddie Mac, Visa and Pall Corporation, affording many the opportunity to gauge the current climate on the field in terms of fair use, trade secrets, and adding value as in-house counsel.
Year after year, the mantra of the conference remains the same – to expand the opportunities for minority attorneys to pursue careers and distinguish themselves in the field of intellectual property law. The Conference’s core objectives include:
● Educating minority and other IP attorneys on current developments in the law in an environment that highlights the social justice obligations of IP law.
● Providing minority and other attorneys in government, civil rights, public interest, and/or non-profit practice a free/nominal fee opportunity to develop IP practice skills.
● Providing an opportunity for experienced minority IP lawyers to demonstrate their expertise in the field to audiences they might not otherwise reach, while offering professional networking opportunities for minority and other IP attorneys.
Studies continue to confirm that African Americans and other minorities are severely underrepresented in intellectual property legal practice, notwithstanding the important contributions these communities make to intellectual property production and use in our society. Contributions from participants and speakers alike have enhanced the significance of the conference as the only intellectual property CLE program of its kind. Erika H. Arner, Managing Partner of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP said, “Now more than ever we need organizations like IIPSJ, taking concrete and impactful actions to advance social justice and IP.”
The 2023 CLE sessions were:
- IP Law Year in Review – Trademark, Patent, and Copyright
- Donald R. Dunner Judicial Panel
- Highlights from the Innovator Diversity Pilots Conference
- Unleashing American Innovation Act
- Leading with IP and Adding Value to Corporations
- How Fair Is Fair Use? A Discussion About Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith
- In House Counsel Discussion on Trade Secret Law
- Updates on College Athletes NIL & Celebrities Right of Publicity
- Ethics
View the full list of videos here.
Thank you to our sponsors!
IIPSJ Attendance at the 64th World Intellectual Property Organization General Assemblies
(WIPO GA) (Geneva, 6-14 July 2023)
By Dr. Metka Potočnik (she/her/hers), Senior Lecturer in Law, Wolverhampton Law School
IIPSJ attended the 64th World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) General Assemblies (GA), in their capacity as the WIPO Accredited Observer. IIPSJ attended the official hearings at the WIPO Headquarters in Geneva, with the Associate Director for International Programmes, Dr Metka Potočnik, attending the length of the proceedings in person. These assemblies brought together a record number of delegates, with over 1,200 delegates in attendance, which exceeded the pre-Covid numbers of attendance in the General Assemblies. A full list of participants is available here, and all the sessions are available for viewing here.
IIPSJ previously observed several WIPO meetings online and took this GA as an opportunity to create strategic partnerships with Member States and other stakeholders, interested in creating access, inclusion and empowerment for under-represented creators and innovators in the global eco-system. IIPSJ representative attended the 10th WIPO-NGO Stakeholder Dialogue, which was organised in parallel with the 64th WIPO GA and took place on Monday, 10 July 2023, at WIPO New Building. WIPO Director General Tang and other WIPO experts met with over 40 Accredited Observers and NGOs, in discussing important issues, which require a multi-stakeholder response. The event has been placed in the spotlight for its importance, and more can be read here.
IIPSJ is aiming to contribute to the future discussions in WIPO, with the aim of building a more inclusive WIPO eco-system. The IIPSJ team are working towards a meaningful participation in the 44th Session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCRR) (see here) and the 31st Session of the Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP) (see here). If you are interested in contributing to IIPSJ work in this space, do contact the IIPSJ directly.
Blog Post: IIPSJ Attendance at the 44th WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR)
IIPSJ Attendance at the 44th World Intellectual Property Organization Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (WIPO SCCR)
Geneva, 6-8 November 2023
IIPSJ attended the 44th World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), in their capacity as the WIPO Accredited Observer. IIPSJ submitted a written statement and attended the official hearings at the WIPO Headquarters in Geneva, with the Associate Director for International Programs, Dr. Metka Potočnik, attending the length of the proceedings in person. These assemblies brought together delegates from Member States in person, and online, and a significant number of observers. A full list of participants is available here, and all the sessions are available for viewing here.
IIPSJ attended the WIPO General Assemblies in July 2023, and at this latest meeting continued to grow strategic partnerships with Member States and other stakeholders, interested in creating access, inclusion and empowerment for under-represented creators and innovators in the global eco-system. Delegates at the SCCR discussed the two standing issues (broadcasting and limitations and exceptions) and some other matters, such as copyright in the digital environment. Full agenda can be viewed here. On copyright in the digital environment IIPSJ representative offered an oral intervention, highlighting the need to align the work of the SCCR with the work WIPO has done in its Intellectual Property Gender Action Plan, which was adopted in 2023 (see here). Furthermore, Dr. Potočnik stressed that all research and evidence collection from artists and creators must be intersectional, focusing not only on all genders, but also race, class, age, (dis)ability of the creators, inclusive IP systems are meant to protect. The written statement can be viewed here (page 3), and the oral intervention is available here (at 02:41:17).
IIPSJ will contribute to future discussions in WIPO, with the aim of building more inclusive IP systems across different jurisdictions. The IIPSJ team are working towards a meaningful participation in the 31st Session of the Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP) (see here), whilst awaiting the confirmation of the 2024 schedule, where further work will be presented. If you are interested in contributing to IIPSJ work in this space, do contact the IIPSJ directly.
