Protecting Factual Compilations—First Amendment Issues by Eric Goldman

Protecting Factual Compilations—First Amendment Issues
Eric Goldman
Marquette University Law School
eric.goldman@marquette.edu
http://eric_goldman.tripod.com

Overview of the Problem

• What the heck does the 1^st Amend. have to do with IP law?
• The tension between IP and 1^st Amendment
  • Copyright, TM & trade secret laws restrict speech
  • Copyright and 1^st Amend. are both in Constitution
• All Internet participation could be speech
  • Online speech and actions manifest via “packets”
  • Limits on “disseminating packets for X purpose”
• Are we regulating theft or speech?  Property or public domain knowledge?

Copyright

• Arguments that 1^st Amend. doesn’t restrict
  • Idea/expression dichotomy and fair use are only 1^st Amend. incursions to Copyright clause (H&R)
  • Copyrights are categorically immune from 1^st Amend. challenges (Eldred DC Cir.)
• Arguments that it does
  • Copyright laws survive 1^st Amend. review only if they produce more speech (Lessig)
  • 3 cases in past 12 months have applied content-neutral 1^st Amend. scrutiny to copyright laws
    • Anti-circumvention restrictions (Corley and Elcomsoft)
    • Satellite Home Viewer Improv. Act (CBS v. Echostar)
    • All 3 provisions survived intermediate scrutiny
• Eric’s take
  • Expect more 1^st Amendment challenges as copyright law extends beyond “writings”
  • Copyright clause creates “Constitutional Umbrella” over copyright laws that protect authors’ writings
  • Speech restriction concerns should be handled through Copyright clause interpretation

Bartnicki v. Vopper (121 S. Ct. 1753 (2001))

• Wiretapping law restricts redistributing contents of an electronic communication knowing that the content was obtained by an illegal interception
• Law violates 1^st Amendment when the contents were a matter of public concern
• But 1^st Amendment doesn’t protect criminal acquisition of information, even if a matter of public concern
• Bartnicki’s effect on copyright, trade secret, misappropriation, trespass and contract laws?

Info Misappropriation (hot news; database laws)

• Arguments that the 1^st Amend. restricts
  • Unless enumerated in Chaplinksy, all speech restrictions trigger 1^st Amend. analysis (Bunner)
    • Trade secret laws aren’t under Constitutional Umbrella
• Arguments that it doesn’t
  • 1^st Amend. only covers forms of social interaction that realize 1^st Amend. values (R. Post)
    • Misappropriation laws will be curtailed only when info is matter of public concern
• Eric’s take
  • If viewed as anti-theft or unfair competition laws, the 1^st Amend. applies but the laws survive unless they restrict matters of public concern

Trespass to Chattels/CFAA

• Arguments that the 1^st Amend. restricts
  • Internet server is public forum (Cyber Promo arg.)
  • State enforcement of trespass laws is a content-neutral regulation of speech (Hamidi amici)
• Argument that it doesn’t
  • No state action (Hamidi, Cyber Promo)
    • Web servers aren’t company towns or public utilities
• Eric’s take
  • As applied to factual compilations, courts will likely treat trespass laws as anti-theft personal property protections rather than as speech restrictions
  • Bartnicki may limit protection of extracted data

Conclusions

• Trespass and core copyright laws probably won’t be subject to 1^st Amend. analysis
• Misappropriation and non-core copyright laws should be subject to 1^st Amend. scrutiny
  • But content-neutral laws will survive unless matter of public concern
• With increasingly expansive IP legislation, expect more 1^st Amend. challenges from SIGs unable to buy statutory exceptions (Lemley)
• The 1^st Amend.’s small role doesn’t mean that more protection of factual compilations is good policy!