Favorite Wisconsin Cases to Teach: State v. Oakley

It’s unusual for a law review in one state to devote an issue to a decision from the supreme court of another state, but that’s exactly what happened when the Western New England Law Review published a 2004 symposium issue concerning State v. Oakley, 629 N.W.2d 200 (Wis. 2001).  I personally welcome the opportunity to teach and, in the process, critique the decision.

The case involved David Oakley, who fathered nine children with four women and was impossibly behind on his child support payments.  Manitowoc County Circuit Court Judge Fred Hazlewood placed Oakley on probation following his conviction for refusing to support his children.  However, the probation was conditioned on Oakley having no more children until he could support the ones he already had.  A four-judge majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court confirmed Hazlewood’s order. 

Commentators predictably discussed the decision’s ramifications for the right to procreate and the larger right to privacy. 

Continue ReadingFavorite Wisconsin Cases to Teach: State v. Oakley

Academic Freedom and Academic Anarchy

Stanley Fish’s most recent column in the New York Times (The Two Languages of Academic Freedom, Feb. 8, 2009) is a good read. Fish tells the story of Denis Rancourt, a tenured full professor of physics at the University of Ottawa. Professor Rancourt is (or perhaps, was) a serious scientist, at least if his profile page at the university’s website is accurate. Under the heading “Main Discoveries and Contributions,” he lists the solution to the Invar Problem of metal physics, the derivation of the fundamental quantification relation of X-ray diffraction, the reactive diagenetic Fe-oxyhydroxide phase in lake and marine sediments, the description of the phenomenon of superferromagnetism, and advances in Mossbauer sprectroscopy methodology and in layer silicate crystal chemistry and geosensors. He lists scientific publications with titles as opaque to a lawyer as the aforementioned “discoveries and contributions.” He was tenured at the U of O in 1984 and far be it from this old lawyer to second guess his academic qualifications.

What gets this obscure Canadian professor a column in the New York Times is not his solution of the Invar Problem of metal physics, but rather the fact that he is a self-professed and practicing academic anarchist. His profile describes himself as “an activist, anarchist, and critical pedagogue.” If his anarchistic activism were limited to speaking and writing, he would be just another campus radical. What got him headlines and an official Recommendation of Termination of Employment from his $120,000 professorship was his pedagogical activity. For example:

Continue ReadingAcademic Freedom and Academic Anarchy

ABA Journal Story on YouTube and Copyright Infringement

I’m quoted in a story in this month’s ABA Journal on the interaction between copyright law and websites that host user-generated content, such as YouTube. YouTube is defending itself right now in a lawsuit pending in the Southern District of New York brought by the media company Viacom. I analyzed the Viacom complaint in a post over on Prawfsblawg shortly after it was filed—all the way back in March 2007. (I recently checked the docket, and the case appears to still be in discovery. The gears of litigation turn slowly.)

The quote in the article is from a later post looking at the implications of a recent Northern District of California decision—Io v. Veoh—for the YouTube case. While most observers saw the defense win in Io to be good news for YouTube, I saw elements of the reasoning that I thought could pose problems for YouTube. That’s because I’ve long argued that the key good fact for Viacom, and possibly the main reason it sued, was not simply the wide availability of Viacom content on YouTube, but this allegation, from Paragraph 7 of the complaint:

Continue ReadingABA Journal Story on YouTube and Copyright Infringement