|
Mark Lemley@marklemley.bsky.social |
This is the actual, original article The Imperial Supreme Court. Accept no imitations from the New York Times, which decided to take the title and idea without attribution (after turning down my op ed with the same title, no less)
harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-13...
4 replies 43 reposts 115 likes
|
Mike Lissner
@michaeljaylissner.com
[ View ] |
Seems like the kind of thing you shouldn’t do to an intellectual property lawyer.
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Blue Meme
@bluememe.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The analysis and framing of this law review article are dead-on. Most such articles are impenetrable to non-lawyers; this one should be easy for most folks to understand.
1 replies 1 reposts 5 likes
|
John Doyle
@jdoyleoss.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Brilliant article, thank you.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Mark Lemley
@marklemley.bsky.social
[ View ] |
To be clear, I don't think this is intellectual property infringement. And I don't blame the author; authors don't get any say in the title their op-ed goes out under. It's just a kind of cheesy move by the New York Times
0 replies 0 reposts 11 likes