State Accountability for Violations of Intellectual Property Rights: How to "Fix" Florida Prepaid (and How Not To)

By Berman, Mitchell N.; Reese, R. Anthony et al. | Texas Law Review, April 2001 | Go to article overview

State Accountability for Violations of Intellectual Property Rights: How to "Fix" Florida Prepaid (and How Not To)


Berman, Mitchell N., Reese, R. Anthony, Young, Ernest A., Texas Law Review


The Great State of Texas may well have had more songs written about it-surely more good songs, in any event-than any other state of the Union.1 The state also makes fairly aggressive efforts to market itself for purposes of attracting tourism, business, and new residents. So what would happen if the state decided to tap into its rich musical resources by using one of these songs as a promotional jingle?2 If this were done without the permission of the original artist, the state might expect a federal copyright lawsuit to recover damages for infringement of the artist's rights under federal intellectual property law.

Such a suit would clearly fail, however, under current law. In two companion cases decided during the October 1998 Term, the Supreme Court raised significant barriers to federal intellectual property suits against state governments. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank held that the constitutional doctrine of state sovereign immunity blocked Congress's effort to subject states to liability for patent infringement under the Patent and Plant Variety Protection Remedy Clarification Act (PRCA).3 The other case, College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board, similarly held that Congress could not subject states to damages liability for false advertising under the Lanham Act.4 While neither of these cases dealt with the copyright laws implicated by our hypothetical, the Fifth Circuit has already relied on Florida Prepaid and College Savings Bank to also bar copyright suits against state entities.5

These developments have sparked efforts in Congress to amend the federal intellectual property laws to ensure that state governments will remain accountable for violations of federal rights. Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont has introduced the Intellectual Property Protection Restoration Act of 1999, which is designed to guarantee remedies for intellectual property violations by state governmental actors.6 And the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently held a conference where experts discussed the Leahy Bill and similar proposals.7 Given the widespread support among beneficiaries of federal intellectual property rights for some sort of legislative action, it appears likely that either some version of the Leahy Bill or some other proposal with similar objectives will ultimately become law.

In this Article, we consider what form such legislation ought to take in order to withstand future constitutional challenge. We focus primarily on Senator Leahy's proposal, both because it is so far the only bill formally put before Congress and because it represents a quite sophisticated effort to come to grips with the relevant constitutional doctrines.8 As we will explain in the pages that follow, we are convinced that many aspects of Senator Leahy's analysis are sound. We would not be legal academics, however, if we did not offer some criticisms and variant proposals of our own. And on some points-particularly the bill's effort to condition federal protection for state innovation on waivers of sovereign immunity-our objections are fairly fundamental.

It may help to make two assumptions clear at the outset. First, we take as given the Rehnquist Court's current jurisprudence on state sovereign immunity9 and the scope of Congress's remedial authority for violations of constitutional rights.10 While many have questioned the Court's approach in both these areas,11 the Court's current majority seems unlikely to abandon its present course and stare decisis may make future changes of direction difficult, even in the event of personnel changes on the bench.12 In any event, a general analysis from first principles of state sovereign immunity or Congress's authority under the Reconstruction Amendments is outside the scope of this Article.

Second, we do not undertake a systematic analysis of the extent to which state governmental entities ought to be subject to the federal intellectual property laws. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

State Accountability for Violations of Intellectual Property Rights: How to "Fix" Florida Prepaid (and How Not To)
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.