Podcast appearances and mentions of Brian L Frye

We're chatting with Brian L. Frye & Jonathan Mann who are taking the fight directly to the SEC.The Vault is a morning show hosted on Twitter Spaces and YouTube Live on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays at 11:30 am EST. The show focuses on multi-chain communities, emerging protocols, NFTFi, DeFi, Gaming, and, most importantly, collecting digital assets.Adam McBride: https://twitter.com/adamamcbrideJake Gallen: https://twitter.com/jakegallen_Chris Devitte: https://twitter.com/chris_devvEmblem Vault: https://twitter.com/EmblemVault

In this episode, Matthew Steilen, Professor of Law at the University of Buffalo School of Law, discusses his draft article "Magna Carta and the Origins of Legislative Power," which is part of a book project. Steilen begins by explaining the origins and purpose of Magna Carta. He then focuses on Chapter 12 of Magna Carta, which requires "common counsel." He explains why the conventional wisdom about the meaning of Chapter 12 is wrong, and how it was really about requiring spirited debate. He reflects on why that was important and how it informed the development of legislative speech. He also reflects on the historiography of Magna Carta. Steilen is on Twitter at @MJSteilen.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Artist Jonathan Mann and lawyer Brian L. Frye are suing the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to clarify that artists' use of NFTs are not securities. Follow us to get all the information on Historical NFTs and the future of web3: Adam - https://x.com/adamamcbride Jake - https://x.com/jakegallen_ Chris - https://x.com/chris_devv Emblem - https://x.com/EmblemVault Recorded on August 7, 2024

Description:In this special episode of Beyond the Code, host Yitzy welcomes back previous guests Brian L. Frye and Jason Gottlieb, along with new guest Jonathan Mann, to discuss their recent lawsuit against the SEC. Jonathan and Brian, both prominent artists in the NFT space, have teamed up with superstar securities lawyer, Morrison & Cohen's Jason Gottlieb, to challenge the SEC's actions against NFT projects like Stoner Cats and Impact Theory. This episode delves into the legal and artistic implications of the SEC's enforcement actions, exploring what this means for the future of digital art and blockchain technology. Subscribe & Follow: Subscribe to Beyond the Code on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Follow us on Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn for updates and more.

In this episode, Alison L. LaCroix, Robert Newton Reid Professor of Law, Associate Member of the Department of History at the University of Chicago Law School, discusses her new book, "The Interbellum Constitution: Union, Commerce, and Slavery in the Age of Federalisms," which is published by Yale University Press. LaCroix explains what made interbellum America unique and what we can learn from interbellum constitutional thought. She describes the unique features of interbellum constitutional ideology and reflects on what it can tell us about constitutional thought today.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Naomi Sunshine, a director in the Public Interest Law Center and Supervising Attorney in the Immigrants Right Clinic at NYU Law School, discusses the process of reclaiming German citizenship under Article 116 Paragraph 2 of the Basic Law, which provides for the restoration of German citizenship to former German citizens deprived of their German citizenship due to “political, racial, or religious grounds” in the time period from January 30, 1933 to May 8, 1945, and their descendants. One of the primary purposes of Article 116 was to restore the German citizenship of denaturalized German Jews. Sunshine describes her family story and explains the process of applying for German citizenship under section 116. She also describes the experience of becoming a German citizen. Here is a link to the application for German citizenship under Article 116.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Henry Oliver, a writer, speaker, and brand consultant based in London, discusses his new book, "Second Act: What Late Bloomers Can Tell You About Reinventing Your Life." Oliver begins by explaining what he means by a "late bloomer" and what their stories can tell us about success. He discusses many historical examples of late bloomers, describing their similarities and differences. And he shares some strategies about achieving success later in life that we can glean from their examples. Oliver is on Twitter at @HenryEOliver. You can also subscribe to his Substanck The Common Reader.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today's show is Part 2 of 2 of our reading of the law review article "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," by attorney and legal scholar Brian L. Frye.In 1939, the US Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision in US v. Miller, shaping the interpretation of the Second Amendment.This case ruled that the Amendment only protected firearms useful to a militia, sparking debates that continue to this day. Ironically enough, contemporary gun control groups argue the opposite viewpoint, claiming that the Second Amendment only safeguards weapons that are not designed for war.Interestingly, the defendants in US v. Miller, Jack Miller and Frank Layton, never presented their arguments in court, leaving many questions unanswered.Despite the lack of opposition, this case is significant as the Supreme Court's first substantial ruling on the Second Amendment.It sheds light on the historical context surrounding gun control and highlights the potential manipulation behind the scenes.In fact, US v. Miller, may have been orchestrated as a test case by supporters of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, aiming to pass gun control legislation without constitutional hindrances.This possibility is well-described in the law review article, "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," buy attorney and legal scholar Brian L. Frye, and published in the New York University Journal of Law & Liberty in 2008 -- ironically enough, the same year in which the Supreme Court decided their second substantive Second Amendment case, District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (US Supreme Court 2008).Understanding the nuances of this case is essential in comprehending the ongoing debate over gun rights in America. Dive into the untold story of US v. Miller and uncover the complexities surrounding this pivotal moment in legal history.BECOME A LAW OF SELF DEFENSE EXPERT IN ONE DAY!Twice a year Attorney Andrew Branca hosts a LIVE full-day Law of Self Defense Advanced Webinar--and one of those rare opportunities is coming up on Saturday, April 20, 2024.Learn how to be HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property against criminal predation, IN A SINGLE DAY.Learn how the criminal justice system perceives and evaluates claims of self-defense, learn the five elements of any self-defense claim, learn defense of others and property, learn how to interact with the police in the aftermath of a use-of-force event, and much, MUCH more.And for a brief time you can SAVE UP TO 50% by registering during the early discount period.Click here NOW to learn more:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/advancedDisclaimer - Content is for educational & entertainment purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice. If you are in need of legal advice you must consult  competent legal counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.#USvMiller #GunControl #SecondAmendment #ConstitutionalRights #SupremeCourt #LegalHistory #2A #NRA #Gu

Today's show is Part 1 of 2 of our reading of the law review article "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," by attorney and legal scholar Brian L. Frye.In 1939, the US Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision in US v. Miller, shaping the interpretation of the Second Amendment.This case ruled that the Amendment only protected firearms useful to a militia, sparking debates that continue to this day. Ironically enough, contemporary gun control groups argue the opposite viewpoint, claiming that the Second Amendment only safeguards weapons that are not designed for war.Interestingly, the defendants in US v. Miller, Jack Miller and Frank Layton, never presented their arguments in court, leaving many questions unanswered.Despite the lack of opposition, this case is significant as the Supreme Court's first substantial ruling on the Second Amendment.It sheds light on the historical context surrounding gun control and highlights the potential manipulation behind the scenes.In fact, US v. Miller, may have been orchestrated as a test case by supporters of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, aiming to pass gun control legislation without constitutional hindrances.This possibility is well-described in the law review article, "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," buy attorney and legal scholar Brian L. Frye, and published in the New York University Journal of Law & Liberty in 2008 -- ironically enough, the same year in which the Supreme Court decided their second substantive Second Amendment case, District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (US Supreme Court 2008).Understanding the nuances of this case is essential in comprehending the ongoing debate over gun rights in America. Dive into the untold story of US v. Miller and uncover the complexities surrounding this pivotal moment in legal history.BECOME A LAW OF SELF DEFENSE EXPERT IN ONE DAY!Twice a year Attorney Andrew Branca hosts a LIVE full-day Law of Self Defense Advanced Webinar--and one of those rare opportunities is coming up on Saturday, April 20, 2024.Learn how to be HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property against criminal predation, IN A SINGLE DAY.Learn how the criminal justice system perceives and evaluates claims of self-defense, learn the five elements of any self-defense claim, learn defense of others and property, learn how to interact with the police in the aftermath of a use-of-force event, and much, MUCH more.And for a brief time you can SAVE UP TO 50% by registering during the early discount period.Click here NOW to learn more:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/advancedDisclaimer - Content is for educational & entertainment purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice. If you are in need of legal advice you must consult  competent legal counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.#USvMiller #GunControl #SecondAmendment #ConstitutionalRights #SupremeCourt #LegalHistory #2A #NRA #Gu

In this episode, Todd Phillips, Assistant Professor at the Georgia State University J. Mack Robinson College of Business, and Beau J. Baumann, a Ph.D. student at Yale Law School, discuss their article "The Major Questions Doctrine's Domain," which will be published in the Brooklyn Law Review. Phillips and Baumann begin by explaining what the major questions doctrine is, how it works, and why it's important. They describe how litigants are challenging SEC enforcement actions against crypto token using MQD-based challenges. And they explain why the MQD shouldn't apply to agency enforcement actions based on judicial interpretations of the scope of agency power, only an agency's own interpretation of its power in the context of legislative rulemaking. Baumann is on Twitter at @beau_baumann and Phillips is on Twitter at @tphillips.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Matt Blaszczyk, an incoming research fellow at the University of Michigan Law School, discusses his article "Impossibility of Emergent Works' Protection in U.S. and EU Copyright Law," which is published in the North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology. Blaszczyk begins by explaining the concept of an "emergent work," or work without a human author, a category of works of authorship that includes AI generated works. He describes several efforts to register emergent works for copyright protection and explains on why they have been unsuccessful. And he reflects on what the category of emergent works can tell us about the ontology and theory of copyright. Blaszczyk is on Twitter at @mmblaszczyk.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Beau Baumann, a PhD candidate at Yale Law School, discusses his article "Americana Administrative Law," which is published in the Georgetown Law Journal. Baumann describes the origins and history of the non-delegation doctrine and the major questions doctrine, explaining how both are rooted in an ideological fantasy of a Congress that never existed, ultimately in service of judicial self-aggrandizement. He reflect on how that happened, why it's a problem, and how scholars should understand it.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Neoshia Roemer, Associate Professor of Law at Seton Hall University School of Law, discusses her article "Equity for American Indian Families," which will be published in the Minnesota Law Review. Roemer explains what the Indian Child Welfare Act does, why it was created, and how some people are using equal protection arguments in order to challenge its constitutionality. She explains why ICWA is so important for both children and tribes, and why the criticisms of it are so misguided. Roemer is on Twitter at @ProfNRoemer.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Rachael Dickson, an Visiting Assistant Professor at the Suffolk University Law School Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship Clinic and for Trademark Examining Attorney at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, discusses her draft article "High Hopes: Cannabis Trademarks at the USPTO." Dickson begins by briefly describing the history of cannabis regulation in the United States. She explains how trademarks work and what they are intended to accomplish, and why cannabis companies want to register federal trademarks for their products. She reflects on the USPTO's refusal to register cannabis marks and the problems it causes. And she encourages the USPTO to change course. Dickson is on Twitter at @TudorsAndTMs.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Rachel O'Dwyer, a lecturer in Digital Cultures in the National College of Art and Design, Dublin, discusses her new book "Tokens: The Future of Money in the Age of the Platform," which is published by Verso Books. O'Dwyer explains what tokens are, how they relate to money, how they have been used at different points in time, and how they are used today. O'Dwyer is on Twitter at @Rachelodwyer.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Claire E. Aubin, a faculty member at Gratz College who will be a lecturer at UC Davis, discusses her work on Holocaust perpetrators, including her dissertation, "From Treblinka to Trenton: Holocaust perpetrators as immigrants to the post-war United States" and her recent article for Time magazine. Aubin explains why Holocaust perpetrators were able to emigrate to the United States without being caught, how they camouflaged themselves from immigration authorities, how some were caught, and why many escaped detection. She explains how studying the experiences of Holocaust perpetrators helps us better understand the historical context in which they were able to escape detection, present themselves as priority candidates for immigration to the United States, and disguise their past. Aubin is on Twitter at @ceaubin.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, David G. Yosifon, Peter Canisius, S.J. Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School of Law, discusses his article "Agent Correction: Chastisement, Wellness, and Personal Ethics," which is published in the Florida State University Law Review. Yosifon begins by describing the broader scholarly project of which this article is a part, investigating how concepts derived from corporate governance can inform and promote human well-being. He describes the early modern concept of "agent correction," which authorized the principal to enforce the agency relationship by "chastizing" or hitting the agent. He explains that the law has long-since rejected agent correction, but observes that the concept of "wellness" may have replaced it as a humane and agent-centered way of encouraging observance of fiduciary obligations and personal ethics. Yosifon is on Twitter at @DavidYosifon.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Christa Laser, Assistant Professor of Law at Cleveland State University College of Law, discusses her article "Legal Issues in Blockchain, Cryptocurrency, and NFTs," which will be published in the Nebraska Law Review. Laser begins by explaining that we should think about the relationship between law and the blockchain as posing questions about how to apply abstract concepts to problems posed by new technologies, not an obligation to create a new body of law. She describes how regulators and courts have applied securities law, intellectual property law, and contract law to blockchain-related problem. And she encourages regulators, courts, and legislators to learn more about how this new technology works before acting to regulate it. Laser is on Twitter at @ChristaLaser.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Zachary L. Catanzaro, Assistant Professor of Law at St. Thomas University Benjamin L. Crump College of Law, discusses his draft article "Beyond Incentives: Copyright in the Age of Algorithmic Production." Catanzaro begins by describing the history of the development of copyright law and how that history shaped the dominant incentives-based theory of copyright. He explains how algorithmic AI programs work, and reflects on how the development of AI technology should affect our assessment of the incentives theory. And he suggests that incentives-based justifications for copyright might need to give way to justifications based on moral rights. Catanzaro is on Twitter at @brainstorm_law.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Sara Protasi, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Puget Sound, discusses her book "The Philosophy of Envy," which is published by Cambridge University Press. Protasi explains how envy is different from other emotions, including jealously. She describes the different kinds of envy. And she argues that at least some kinds of envy are good and should be encouraged, even though some other kinds are bad. Protasi is on Twitter at @natadicorsa.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Michael Smith, Assistant Professor of Law at St. Mary's University School of Law, discusses his article "Library Crime," which will be published in the Drake Law Review. Smith describes the different kinds of crimes that are specific to libraries, how they differ from state to state, and why they exist. He reflects on library crimes and what they can tell us about libraries as institutions. And he explain how library crimes illuminate the purposes of criminal justice more generally. Smith is on Twitter at @msmith750.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Jacob Gordon, a recent graduate of Harvard Law School, discusses his draft article "Gang Violence and Just War Theory." Gordon begins by explaining the basic premises of just war theory. He then describes common features of gangs, and how they often track with the features considered by just war theory. He argues that concepts drawn from just war theory can help us better understand the relative culpability of gang members for gang violence, and argues that gang participation should mitigate moral culpability for violence, at least in some circumstances. This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Paul Gowder, Associate Dean of Research and Intellectual Life and Professor of Law at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, discusses his book The Rule of Law in the United States: An Unfinished Project of Black Liberation which is published by Hart Publishing and available as an open-access download. Gowder begins by discussing open-access publishing and the design on the book. He explains what he means by "the rule of law" and why he sees it as fundamentally tied to the historical project of black liberation. He reflects on how many of our governmental institutions provide only the illusion of the rule of law, and explains how and why the rule of law must be defended and expanded.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Jordana R. Goodman, Assistant Professor of Law at Chicago-Kent College of Law, discusses her article "Ms. Attribution: How Authorship Credit Contributes to the Gender Gap," which is published in the Yale Journal of Law & Technology. Goodman begin by describing the "gender gap" and how it affects the practice of law. She explains how the "Matthew" and "Matilda" effects under-recognize the contributions of women in legal practice, and how lack of attribution helps perpetuate the gender gap. She describe her empirical study of attribution in patent practice. And she makes suggestions for how to increase attribution to women. Goodman is on Twitter at @Jordi_Goodman.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Amanda Levendowski, Associate Professor of Law and Founding Director of the Intellectual Property and Information Policy Clinic at Georgetown Law, discusses her articles "Just Citation," which will be published in the Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice, and "Disrupting Data Cartels by Editing Wikipedia," which she co-authored with Eun Hee Han and Jonah Perlin, and which is published in the Yale Journal of Law & Technology. Levendowski explains how to think intersectionally about citation practices, and why who and what you cite matters. And she describes how editing Wikipedia can be a valuable pedagogical practice, with normative benefits. Levendowski is on Twitter at @levendowski.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Kenneth A. Adams, an attorney and expert on contract drafting, discusses his book, "A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting," which is published by the ABA. Adams describes how he became interested in the style of contract drafting and why he thinks it is often so bad. He explains how contract drafting can and why better drafted contracts are preferable. And he provides specific examples of improved drafting from his book. In the course of the interview, Adams also provides comments on a short contract I drafted. You can see his written comments here.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Lisa P. Ramsey, Professor of Law at the University of San Diego School of Law, discusses the Supreme Court's recent decision in Jack Daniel's v. VIP products in light of her article "Raising the Threshold for Trademark Infringement to Protect Free Expression," which she co-authored with Christine Haight Farley, and which is published in the American University Law Review. Ramsey begins by describing what happened in the Jack Daniel's case and why the Supreme Court's opinion is narrower than a lot of commenters realize. She explains why cases like Jack Daniel's present First Amendment problems, and how those problems can be avoided by more robust defenses to trademark infringement and dilution. Ramsey is on Twitter at @LPRamsey.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us for a wildly fun conversation about the NFT art market, copyright, plagiarism, and more with IP lawyer and conceptual artist Brian L Frye.

Brian L. Frye is a law professor at the University of Kentucky. His research focuses on intellectual property and charity law, especially in relation to artists and arts organizations. Professor Frye is also an artist and filmmaker and just a really interesting dude. Among other works, he produced the documentary 'Our Nixon' (2013), which was broadcast by CNN and opened theatrically nationwide. Highlights: [5:30] - Is academic literature facing an existential risk in light of ChatGPT and other AIs? [11:40] - Advocating for Plagiarism [20:00] - Generative art: Is it copyrightable? Challenges in IP distribution, licensing, and use in the NFT market. [37:10] - Charities and non-profits in web3 [43:10] - DAOs [45:00] - Resale royalties Links: 1. ROYALTIES AND THE NEW COLLECTOR ECONOMY, Prof. Brian L. Frye - https://www.rightclicksave.com/article/royalties-and-the-new-collector-economy 2. Video where I called Brian, Philip

In this episode, Elise Bernlohr Maizel, Acting Assistant Professor of Lawyering at NYU Law School, discusses her article "The Case for Downsizing the Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege." Maizel begins by describing the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. She explains why the attorney-client privilege doctrine has always been a poor fit for corporate clients. And she proposes a new model for the attorney-client privilege in the corporate context that is both more conceptually coherent and practically desirable. Maizel is on Twitter at @eliseconstance.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Aliza Schatzman, President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, discusses her new article, "The Conservative Case for the Judiciary Accountability Act," which is published in the Harvard Journal on Legislation. Schatzman observes that the federal judiciary has a harassment problem and describes her own experience of harassment. She describes the Judicial Accountability Act, which would impose Title VII requirements on the federal judiciary, among other protections. And she explains why conservative lawmakers should support the legislation. This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Ari Cohn, Free Speech Counsel at Tech Freedom, discusses the proposed Kids Online Safety Act, which the Senate is currently considering. Cohn begins by explaining the history of KOSA and similar previous bills, what KOSA is supposed to accomplish, and how it's supposed to accomplish that goal. He explains why KOSA as drafted presents intractable practical and First Amendment problems. And he argues that Congress should reject KOSA in its entirety. Cohn is on Twitter at @AriCohn.A current version of KOSA is available here.Tech Freedom's letter opposing KOSA is available here.A coalition letter opposing KOSA is available here.Additional information is available here.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Neil Chilson, a senior research fellow for technology and innovation at Stand Together and former chief technologist at the FTC, discusses the FTC's proposal to create a trade regulation rule on commercial surveillance and data security. Chilson begins by discussing the FTC's history of rulemaking and why this rulemaking proposal is important. He reflects on what the FTC might be trying to achieve in this rulemaking process and discusses some potential concerns. He also discusses his own public comments, some of which he produced using an AI text generator, in order to express concerns about the potential effect of regulation on the development of AI tools. Chilson is on Twitter at @neil_chilson.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Sarah Polcz, a fellow at Stanford Law School, discusses her articles "Co-Creating Equality," which will be published in the Southern California Law Review, and "Loyalties & Royalties," which will be published in the Hastings Law Journal. Polcz describes her empirical research on the distribution of songwriting credit in the music business. She explains how authorship norms among songwriters differ from the default rules of copyright because of the incentives that are salient to bands. And she reflects on what her work can tell us about copyright incentives more broadly. Polcz is on Twitter at @SPolcz.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Daniel Schwarcz, Fredrikson & Byron Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School, Josephine Wolff, Associate Professor of Cybersecurity Policy at the Fletcher School at Tufts University, and Daniel W. Woods, Lecturer of Cybersecurity at the University of Edinburgh School of Informatics, discuss their article "How Privilege Undermines Cybersecurity," which will be published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Technology. They begin by explaining what the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrines are and how they negatively affect cybersecurity investigations and the implementation of lessons learned from those investigations. They describe their qualitative study of lawyers and cybersecurity professionals conducting cybersecurity investigations. And they make recommendations about how courts could amend their approach to privilege to improve cybersecurity outcomes.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Michele Colonna, an art collector, NFT advisor, and co-founder of Árthropo, a web3 native crypto art project, discusses his perspective on the art market and the NFT market. Colonna describes how he became interested in NFTs, how he views the relationship between the NFT market and the conventional art market, and where he sees the future of the NFT market heading. Colonna is on Twitter at @mcolonna65.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Robin Schmidt, a journalist covering web3, decentralized finance, NFTs, and the metaverse. Schmidt explains how he became interested in the web3 space and how he made the move from commercial motion picture production to journalism. He describes his work at The Defiant creating video journalism covering developments in decentralized finance, and his approach to creating that content. And he describes his new project BasedAF which will focus on the metaverse. You can watch Schmidt's work for The Defiant here. He is on Twitter at @IamSuperMassive.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Anjali Vats, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, discusses her book "The Color of Creatorship: Intellectual Property, Race, and the Making of Americans," which is published by Stanford University Press. She explains how critical race theory can and should inform our understanding of the history of intellectual property. Vats is on Twitter at @raceip.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Christa Laser, Assistant Professor of Law at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, discusses her work on blockchain, NFTs, and intellectual property, from the perspective of a law professor and former intellectual property litigator. Among other things, she discusses blockchain patents, copyright in NFT images, and trademark in NFT brands. Laser is on Twitter at @ChristaLaser.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Paul Edelblut, the grandson of Welford O. Lucy, discusses the iconic 1954 contract case Lucy v. Zehmer and what he learned about it from his grandfather.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, Jorge L. Contreras, Professor of Law at the University of Utah College of Law, discusses his book "The Genome Defense: Inside the Epic Legal Battle to Determine Who Owns Your DNA," which is published by Algonquin Books. Contreras describes the landmark Supreme Court patent case Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics and explains why it was important. He recounts the story of the case and how he reported on it. And he reflects on what it can tell us about patent policy.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Brian L. Frye joins us on the podcast to discuss, among many things, law professorship, legal scholarship, and the need for making nuanced academic material more accessible and understandable for the everyday person. Gus and Brian also explore the idea of what it looks like when conceptual art and legal scholarship overlap. Brian L. Frye is the Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law, as well as a filmmaker, and artist.

In this episode, Aliza Shatzman, an attorney and advocate based in Washington, DC, discusses her article "Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it," which will be published in the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law. Here is the abstract:Drawing from the author's own experience of gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation during her clerkship and in the years following it by a former DC Superior Court judge, this Article analyzes the deficits in current federal and DC judicial reporting systems to demonstrate the urgent need for reform. I argue that harassment in the judiciary is pervasive, due to both enormous power disparities between judges and law clerks, and various institutional barriers that perpetuate misconduct and discourage reporting. I survey existing methods of judicial discipline in both the federal and DC Courts and argue that these provide insufficient redress for workplace misconduct. I then discuss the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA) (HR 4827/S 2553), which would finally protect judiciary employees, including law clerks and federal public defenders, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, enabling employees to sue their harassers and seek damages for harm done to their careers, reputations, and future earning potential. Furthermore, I argue that the DC Courts should be included in the JAA, because they are Article I courts created and regulated by Congress, and DC Courts judges are arguably federal judges for Title VII and disciplinary purposes. I also offer a variety of other proposed reforms, which would both strengthen the JAA and provide additional protections to uniquely vulnerable judiciary employees. I conclude by reflecting on my attempts to report the misconduct I experienced, how the systems failed me when I tried to report, and my efforts to seek justice for myself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This podcast is a brief overview of the practice of law and what will be discussed in this series. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.

This podcast will discuss the attorney-client relationship. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.

This podcast will discuss the legal duties of an attorney. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.

This podcast will discuss conflicts of interest. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.

This podcast will discuss confidentiality. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.

This podcast will discuss advocacy and conduct. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.

This podcast will discuss the regulation of the legal profession. Derivative work from the following original:Brian L. Frye & Elizabeth Schiller, Professional Responsibility: An Open-Source Casebook. Available as Creative Commons 0 / No Rights Reserved. This derivative work is licensed the same as the original.