Showing archive for: “First Amendment”
Section 230 principles for lawmakers and a note of caution as Trump convenes his “social media summit”
Neither side in the debate over Section 230 is blameless for the current state of affairs. Reform/repeal proponents have tended to offer ill-considered, irrelevant, or often simply incorrect justifications for amending or tossing Section 230. Meanwhile, many supporters of the law in its current form are reflexively resistant to any change and too quick to dismiss the more reasonable concerns that have been voiced. Most of all, the urge to politicize this issue — on all sides — stands squarely in the way of any sensible discussion and thus of any sensible reform.
The Australian approach to “consumer protection” policy is a threat to consumer welfare and free speech
The US Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights recently held hearings to see what, if anything, the U.S. might learn from the approaches of other countries regarding antitrust and consumer protection. US lawmakers would do well to be wary of examples from other jurisdictions, however, that are rooted in different legal and ... The Australian approach to “consumer protection” policy is a threat to consumer welfare and free speech
Telemarketing, Technology, and Why the Telephone Sucks (and how to fix it)
It is a truth universally acknowledged that unwanted telephone calls are among the most reviled annoyances known to man. But this does not mean that laws intended to prohibit these calls are themselves necessarily good. Indeed, in one sense we know intuitively that they are not good. These laws have proven wholly ineffective at curtailing ... Telemarketing, Technology, and Why the Telephone Sucks (and how to fix it)
A Judicial Nod to Empirically-Based Regulation
The cause of basing regulation on evidence-based empirical science (rather than mere negative publicity) – and of preventing regulatory interference with First Amendment commercial speech rights – got a judicial boost on February 26. Specifically, in National Association of Wheat Growers et al. v. Zeise (Monsanto Case), a California federal district court judge preliminarily enjoined ... A Judicial Nod to Empirically-Based Regulation
Why the Canadian Supreme Court’s Equustek decision is a good thing for freedom — even on the Internet
I recently published a piece in the Hill welcoming the Canadian Supreme Court’s decision in Google v. Equustek. In this post I expand (at length) upon my assessment of the case. In its decision, the Court upheld injunctive relief against Google, directing the company to avoid indexing websites offering the infringing goods in question, regardless ... Why the Canadian Supreme Court’s Equustek decision is a good thing for freedom — even on the Internet
The Demise of Lanham Act Trademark Disparagement Limitations Promotes Sound Free Market Economic Principles
Background On June 19, in Matal v. Tam, the U.S. Supreme Court (Justice Gorsuch did not participate in the case) affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the Lanham Act’s “disparagement clause” is unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s free speech clause. The Patent and Trademark Office denied the Slants’ (an Asian rock group) federal trademark registration, ... The Demise of Lanham Act Trademark Disparagement Limitations Promotes Sound Free Market Economic Principles
The FTC Takes on “Petitioning” of Government as an Anticompetitive Exclusionary Tactic
Background Some of the most pernicious and welfare-inimical anticompetitive activity stems from the efforts of firms to use governmental regulation to raise rivals’ costs or totally exclude them from the market (see, for example, here). The surest cure to such economic harm is, of course, the elimination or reform of anticompetitive government laws and regulations, ... The FTC Takes on “Petitioning” of Government as an Anticompetitive Exclusionary Tactic
Sixth Circuit’s Decision Rejecting FCC Preemption of State Restrictions on Municipal Broadband Ownership Strikes a Blow in Favor of the Rule of Law (But a Broader Problem Remains)
The American concept of “the rule of law” (see here) is embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and in the constitutional principles of separation of powers, an independent judiciary, a government under law, and equality of all before the law (see here). It holds that the executive ... Sixth Circuit’s Decision Rejecting FCC Preemption of State Restrictions on Municipal Broadband Ownership Strikes a Blow in Favor of the Rule of Law (But a Broader Problem Remains)
Welcome guest blogger David Olson
I’m delighted to announce that David Olson will be guest blogging at Truth on the Market this summer. David is an Associate Professor at Boston College Law School. He teaches antitrust, patents, and intellectual property law. Professor Olson’s writing has been cited in Supreme Court and other legal opinions. Olson came to Boston College from Stanford ... Welcome guest blogger David Olson
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Reforms Needed to Promote Path-Breaking Biopharmaceutical Innovation
Yesterday the Heritage Foundation published a Legal Memorandum, in which I explain the need for the reform of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation, in order to promote path-breaking biopharmaceutical innovation. Highlights of this Legal Memorandum are set forth below. In recent decades, U.S. and foreign biopharmaceutical companies (makers of drugs that are based ... U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Reforms Needed to Promote Path-Breaking Biopharmaceutical Innovation
A Win for Free Speech: Federal Circuit Holds (part of) §2(a) of the Lanham Act Unconstitutional
It is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment that the government may not penalize private speech merely because it disapproves of the message it conveys. The Federal Circuit handed down a victory for free expression today — in the commercial context no less. At issue was the Lanham Act’s § 2(a) prohibition of trademark registrations that ... A Win for Free Speech: Federal Circuit Holds (part of) §2(a) of the Lanham Act Unconstitutional
Supporting my Mizzou Students
Unless you live under a rock, you know that the president and chancellor of the University of Missouri, where I teach law, have resigned in response to protests over their failure to respond to several (three identified) racist incidents on campus. A group called Concerned Student 1950 staged a series of protests and demanded, among other things, ... Supporting my Mizzou Students
