UnCommon Law

Artist Jason M. Allen sparked controversy winning an art contest with AI-generated artwork. He faced backlash over attributing authorship to AI. The debate revolves around copyright ownership of AI-created art. Experts explore the implications of AI on traditional copyright laws and the future of artistry.

The podcast dives into the legal battles surrounding AI companies and copyright infringement. It explores the delicate balance between technological advancement and protecting creators' rights. Listeners will learn about the complexities of fair use as it relates to AI-generated content, and the transformative nature of AI in processing written work. Insightful discussions include landmark cases, like the Google Books controversy, and the implications of lawsuits from major publishers. The future of creativity in the age of AI hangs in the balance!

The podcast explores how AI models are trained on copyrighted works of famous authors, sparking legal battles over copyright infringement. Guests discuss the challenges of protecting intellectual property in the AI age and lawsuits against AI companies for unauthorized use of content. The episode also delves into the unethical use of pirated materials by AI companies and the implications of using copyrighted content to train AI models.

When Scott Griffin visited the Haunted Trail, he expected to be scared. But he did not expect what happened after he thought the scare was over.This special Halloween episode of UnCommon Law tells the true story of a man terrorized by a haunted house attraction. Griffin bought a ticket to a haunted house — but ended up getting more than he bargained for: two broken wrists. He sued for negligence and assault. Can someone who paid to be frightened sue when things go too far? Guests: P. Christopher Ardalan, attorney at Ardalan & Associates, PLC Larry Levine, law professor at the University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law ***Host/Producer: Matthew S. SchwartzEditor/Executive Producer: Josh BlockCover Art: Jonathan Hurtarte

In the conclusion of UnCommon Law's season-long exploration of noncompete agreements, we look at the Federal Trade Commission's authority to ban the clauses nationwide.We’ve reviewed how the ban would work and explored the policy arguments for and against it. Now we delve into a more fundamental question: Does the FTC even have the power to make a substantive rule like this one?It's been 50 years since the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FTC has substantive rulemaking power. We’ll learn about that case — National Petroleum Refiners Association v. FTC — we’ll find out why it’s so important to the FTC, and we’ll hear why many believe it would not turn out the same way today.But that's not all! Even if courts follow National Petroleum, could the FTC get past the major questions doctrine?The season finale of UnCommon Law features: Richard Pierce, professor at the George Washington University Law School Dan Papscun, antitrust reporter for Bloomberg Law Sean Heather, senior vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Sandeep Vaheesan, legal director at the Open Markets Institute Orly Lobel, professor at the University of San Diego School of Law Matt's baby ***Host/Producer: Matthew S. SchwartzEditor/Executive Producer: Josh BlockCover Art: Jonathan Hurtarte

The Supreme Court has effectively ended the use of race as a factor in college admissions. In a 6-3 ruling, along ideological lines, the divided Supreme Court struck down the admissions programs of Harvard and the University of North Carolina, which both used race as a factor in their admissions process. Today, on this special edition of UnCommon Law, we’ll learn how the court came to its decision. And: Did the majority leave the door open for colleges to still consider race in some circumstances? We’ll learn why some supporters of affirmative action still have a glimmer of hope.Featuring: Ted Shaw — Professor at the University of North Carolina, and past president of the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund Michelle Adams — Professor at the University of Michigan Law School Lee Bollinger — Outgoing president of Columbia University, and former president of the University of Michigan Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions

In its proposal to ban noncompete agreements nationwide, the Federal Trade Commission has touted the potential benefits to workers and the economy. But how would a ban impact business owners? This week on UnCommon Law, part four of our series on the agency's proposal. Why are so many business owners so adamant that they need to be able to use noncompetes, even when other legal tools — like trade secret laws and nonsolicitation agreements — might protect companies without limiting employee mobility? Featuring: Russell Beck, trade secrets and employment mobility lawyer; founder at Beck Reed Riden LLP Paul Dacier, EVP and general counsel at Indigo Agriculture; formerly EVP and general counsel at EMC Corporation Syreeta Mitchell, president and CEO of MPower Logistics ***Host/Producer: Matthew S. SchwartzEditor/Executive Producer: Josh BlockCover Art: Jonathan Hurtarte

California is one of just three states where noncompete agreements are almost completely banned. California is also the home of Silicon Valley, the global hub of technological innovation. Is that just a coincidence? Or would Silicon Valley be as successful even if noncompete agreements were allowed? This week on UnCommon Law, part three of our ongoing series on the Federal Trade Commission's proposal to ban noncompete agreements nationwide. Is California’s ban on noncompete agreements really a key component to Silicon Valley’s success? Guests: Evan Starr, professor at University of Maryland Margaret O'Mara, professor at the University of Washington Ronald Gilson, professor emeritus at Columbia Law School and Stanford Law School David Schultz, host of Bloomberg Law's On the Merits ***Host/Producer: Matthew S. SchwartzEditor/Executive Producer: Josh BlockCover Art: Jonathan Hurtarte

This week on Uncommon Law: the second episode in our podcast series about the Federal Trade Commission’s proposed nationwide ban on noncompete agreements. We’ll look at one Minnesota hair salon and see how noncompete agreements often play out in the real world. What happens when employees leave the hair salon and try to strike out on their own? Guests: Heidi Hautala, a hair stylist in Minnesota  Evan Starr, professor at University of Maryland Emily Olson, a hair stylist in Minnesota Kylee Simonson, owner of Simonson's Salon & Spa Chris Penwell, attorney at Siegel Brill The case discussed in this episode is Simonson's Salon and Spa vs. Heidi Hautala, Docket No. 27-CV-15-5647 (Minn. Dist. Ct. Apr 03, 2015)***Host/Producer: Matthew S. SchwartzEditor/Executive Producer: Josh BlockCover Art: Jonathan Hurtarte

This season on UnCommon Law, we’re exploring one of the most expansive Federal Trade Commission proposals of the last half century: a near-total nationwide ban on noncompete clauses. We’ll examine arguments for the ban, and talk to workers who’ve had their livelihoods crushed by oppressive covenants not to compete. We’ll look at arguments in favor of keeping noncompetes, and talk with business owners who say they’re crucial for keeping trade secrets confidential and protecting business relationships. Finally, we’ll explore a more fundamental question: Does the FTC even have the legal authority to do this? Our first episode explores how this unprecedented proposal came to be. To understand just how out-of-the-ordinary this proposal is, we'll journey into the history of the agency, whose past rulemakings got them labeled the "national nanny" by the Washington Post, and led to threats of defunding.Guests: Emily Olson, hair stylist Leah Nylen, Bloomberg News reporter Sandeep Vaheesan, legal director of the Open Markets Institute Evan Starr, professor at the University of Maryland ***Host/Producer: Matthew S. SchwartzEditor/Executive Producer: Josh BlockCover Art: Jonathan Hurtarte