“Ex-NCAA athletes can sue Electronic Arts over video game likenesses”: Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update headlined “EA loses ruling in ‘NCAA Football’ suit.”
USA Today reports that “U.S. appeals court rejects EA in another likeness case.”
In Thursday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Joe Palazzolo will have an article headlined “Appeals Court Says Ex-College Stars Can Sue Videogame Maker Electronic Arts; Football and Basketball Players Protested Use of Their Likenesses.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.
Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Ex-NCAA athletes score court victory over EA video games.”
Bloomberg News reports that “EA Loses Bid to End Athletes’ Suit Over Use of Likenesses.”
The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: College athletes can sue EA over images.”
At her “Trial Insider” blog, Pamela A. MacLean has a post titled “Electronic Arts Must Face College Athlete Likeness Suit.”
At the “Hollywood, Esq.” blog of The Hollywood Reporter, Eriq Gardner has a post titled “Appeals Court Rules on Use of Athletes in Video Games; Whether or not the First Amendment protects celebrity exploitation is a hot topic in the legal system.”
And Variety reports that “Electronic Arts Loses Latest Round in Suit Over NCAA Player Likenesses.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued rulings today in two related cases, which you can access here and here.
“Samuel Alito Will Save America’s Privacy: A lower court’s ruling on warrantless cellphone searches is doomed at the Supreme Court — thanks to Justice Alito.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“New Jersey Gun-Carrying Limits Upheld by Appeals Court”: Bloomberg News has this report on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued today.
“Next Citizens United? McCutcheon Supreme Court Case Targets Campaign Contribution Limits.” Paul Blumenthal of The Huffington Post has this report.
“Patent life: how the Supreme Court fell short.” Maggie Koerth-Baker has this post today at “Boing Boing.”
“Democrats To Introduce Supreme Court Ethics Bill”: Stephanie Mencimer has this post today at the “Political MoJo” blog of Mother Jones.
“The (Almost) Lost Speech of Justice Anthony Kennedy: How his insightful remarks about the Constitution inadvertently make the case for a Supreme Court ‘media pool.'” Andrew Cohen has this essay online today at The Atlantic.
“The Next Filibuster Face-Off: Obama’s Judicial Nominees.” Sahil Kapur of TPM DC has this report.
“Ginsburg’s dedication undimmed after 20 years on court”: Richard Wolf will have this article Thursday in USA Today.
“Ed Carnes to succeed Joel Dubina as Chief Judge of federal appeals circuit”: The Montgomery Advertiser has this news update.
Programming note: Due to a family outing to attend this morning’s Lakewood (N.J.) BlueClaws game (11:05 a.m. start; access the game preview at this link), additional posts will not appear here until this afternoon.
The BlueClaws (the Class A affiliate of the Philadelphia Phillies) are hosting the Hagerstown (Md.) Suns (the Class A affiliate of the Washington Nationals).
“Widening Regional Divide over Abortion Laws”: Pew Research Center for People & the Press issued this news release on Monday. You can access the complete survey results at this link.
And at Forbes.com, David Davenport has an essay titled “The Supreme Court’s Gay Marriage Decisions Reverberate Through The States.”
“Right-to-die battle: court of appeal rejects paralysed man’s case; Judges reject Paul Lamb’s request for help from doctors to die but allow another man to get help to travel to Swiss clinic.” The Guardian (UK) has this report.
And The Associated Press reports that “UK court rules against euthanasia.”
“Supreme Court decision bolsters challenge to Oklahoma gay marriage ban, couple argues in state case; The U.S. Supreme Court’s move to strike down federal law has ignited a flurry of activity in the long-dormant state challenge to Oklahoma’s ban on gay marriage”: Chris Casteel has this article today in The Oklahoman.
“The people’s judge”: Today’s edition of The Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania contains an article that begins, “Standing before a cadre of judges representing every level of the state judicial system and hundreds of family members, friends and colleagues overflowing from the rotunda of the Luzerne County Courthouse, Correale F. Stevens on Tuesday took his oath of office as the newest member of the state’s highest court.”
And today’s edition of The Citizens’ Voice of Wilkes-Barre contains an article headlined “Stevens sworn in as state Supreme Court justice.”
The online biography of Pa. Supreme Court Justice Correale F. Stevens can be accessed here.
Promise kept: Back on December 11, 2012, in previewing an oral argument that I would be delivering the next day, I wrote “Eventually, the video of the oral argument should be available online via the web site of the Pennsylvania Cable Network. I will link to the video when it becomes available.”
Unfortunately, as time passed, the video did not become available online. In relatively short order, my client won the appeal (and I collected news coverage of the outcome here, here, and here). Once the decision issued, I stopped checking to see if the oral argument had become available online.
Now, however, I see that PCN at some point finally posted the video of the oral argument online. The oral argument video is the first case that appears in “part two” of the video proceedings available online via this link.
“Senators Coons, Leahy introduce bill to create 91 new judgeships; Legislation is based on recommendations of nonpartisan Judicial Conference led by Chief Justice John Roberts”: U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) issued this news release today.
“SCOTUSblog on camera: Geoffrey Stone part two.” Today at “SCOTUSblog,” you can access at this link part two of a video interview with law professor Geoffrey R. Stone.
“Warrantless Cellphone Tracking Is Upheld”: This article will appear Wednesday in The New York Times.
Cyrus Farivar of Ars Technica has a report headlined “Again, federal court finds cops don’t need a warrant for cellphone location data; If you want your records anonymized, tell ‘the market or the political process.‘”
And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Orin Kerr has a post titled “Fifth Circuit Hands Down Long-Awaited Case on the Fourth Amendment, Cell-Site Data, and Ex Parte Decisionmaking.”
“Pentagon: Guantanamo tab $5.2B and counting.” Carol Rosenberg of The Miami Herald has this report.
“Underemployed Cooley Law grads lose the war, but win the battle”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this report.
My earlier coverage of today’s Sixth Circuit ruling appears at this link.
“Obama administration to release secret court order on phone records”: The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
“Lawyer Who Beat Chevron in Ecuador Faces Trial of His Own”: This article will appear Wednesday in The New York Times.
“Holder’s Texas-Sized Gambit after Voting Act Loss”: Law professor Richard L. Hasen — author of the “Election Law Blog” — has this essay online at The National Law Journal.
“The Next Big Test of Corporate Personhood”: David H. Gans has this post today at the “Text & History Blog” of the Constitutional Accountability Center.
“Cops Can Track Cellphones Without Warrants, Appeals Court Rules”: David Kravets has this post today at Wired.com’s “Threat Level” blog.
You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit at this link.
Update: At “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Cellphone privacy case on way to Court?”
“Lawsuit over 2009 Oscar Grant BART fracas can proceed”: Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has this update.
And at her “Trial Insider” blog, Pamela A. MacLean has a post titled “Ex-BART Cop Must Face Civil Suit in Oscar Grant Shooting.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Air Marshal Disclosed ‘Sensitive’ Info Online, D.C. Circuit Says”: At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Mike Scarcella had this post reporting on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unsealed today.
“Appeals court upholds ruling striking down NYC’s large soda ban; Mayor Michael Bloomberg had advanced the regulation as a way to combat obesity among city residents”: The New York Daily News has this update.
The New York Post has a news update headlined “Appeals court upholds ruling slapping down Mayor Bloomberg’s soda ban.”
Bloomberg News reports that “N.Y.’s Large Soda Ban Block Ruling Upheld on Appeal.”
Reuters reports that “Appeals court upholds ruling that halted NYC’s large-soda ban.”
The Associated Press has a report headlined “Appeals court: NYC’s big-soda ban unconstitutional.”
You can access today’s ruling of the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, at this link.
“MIT report finds university never pushed for prosecution or punishment for Aaron Swartz”: The Boston Globe has this news update.
John Schwartz of The New York Times has a news update headlined “M.I.T. Releases Report on Its Role in the Case of Aaron Swartz.”
And The Boston Herald has a news update headlined “MIT report finds ‘no wrongdoing’ in Aaron Swartz case.”
I previously linked to the report in this post from earlier today.
“Imprisoned Al-Qaeda Translator Cites Speech Freedom in Appeal”: Bloomberg News has this report.
Update: In other coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Mass. convict in terror case argues court appeal.”
“The Third Circuit Is Wrong Again: ‘For-Profit, Secular Corporations’ Can Engage in the ‘Exercise of Religion.'” At “walshsblog,” law professor Kevin C. Walsh has this post today.
“Report to the President: MIT and the Prosecution of Aaron Swartz.” MIT today posted online this lengthy report, along with a letter from MIT’s president.
The web page where the report is posted online also provides access to some related materials.
“The plaintiffs, twelve graduates of the Thomas M. Cooley Law School, sued their alma mater in district court, alleging that the school disseminated false employment statistics which misled them into deciding to attend Cooley.” So begins an opinion that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.
“A Judicial Whodunnit: Shedding Light On Unsigned Opinions.” Andrew Lo has this essay online today at the “Cognoscenti” page of Boston’s WBUR Radio.
Earlier this month, I had this post linking to the full paper.
