This book surveys the law of mass communications with references to print, radio, television, Internet, and other technologies of distribution. Written in a style that is accessible to law students as well as non-law students, this text focuses on regulation of speech content under the First Amendment, including laws relating to defamation, invasion of privacy, the right of publicity, indecency and obscenity, advertising, newsgathering, media violence, and media diversity. Michael M. Epstein is a Professor of Law at Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles. A founding faculty member of the Donald E. Biederman Entertainment and Media Law Institute at Southwestern, Professor Epstein is an interdisciplinary scholar specializing in media, telecommunications, international law, and popular culture. Since 2009, Professor Epstein has been the principal editor of the Journal of International Media and Entertainment Law, a faculty-edited law review published jointly by the American Bar Association and Southwestern Law School. He also directs the Amicus Project at Southwestern, a pro bono outreach program that invites law students to prepare amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs before the US Supreme Court and in other jurisdictions. Professor Epstein received his undergraduate and law degrees from Columbia University and returned to academia to earn his MA and PhD in American Culture at the University of Michigan.
See also Country Community Timberlake Village v. HMW Special Utility District of Harris, 438 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) (holding that a neighboring ...
After Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's pierced nipple on national television for 9/16ths of a second, the FCC received over 540,000 complaints.
Volume III: The Chesapeake and New England, 1660-1750 William E. Nelson ... Decision of Law, Surry County Ct. 1673/74, in Eliza Timberlake Davis ed., ...
E. Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941), 66 Edwards v. Housing Authority of City of ... Timberlake, 148 Ind. 38,46 N.E.339 (1897), 69,70 Graves v.
Fitzgerald, 4.08[B][2], 5.05[D] Fitzgerald v. ... Mastrapa-Font, 7.03[A][3] Fontaine, In re, 5.05[D] Fontenette v. ... Frost, 5.05[A] Formato v.
The sole remedy is avoidance, however; damages cannot be claimed under s. ... 17, it places a great deal of power in the hands of insurance companies to ...
Normally, a mate«s receipt would later be given up for a bill of lading, ... they necessarily prejudice the rights of those who deal in the goods ...
27 257 U.S. 184, 42 S. Ct. 72, 66 L. Ed. 189 (1921). ... 38 Argensinger, “Right to Strike”: Labor Organization and the New Deal in Baltimore, 78 MD . HIST .
704 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, s. 80. 705 Leith v. Gould [1986] 1 NZLR 760. It is not clear how a New Zealand court would deal with a case such ...
... to meet the reasonable expectations of claimants about how the corporation should deal with them, by, inter alia, ... 7 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, s.