Table of Contents

How Copyright Law May Affect Pop Music Without Our Knowing it

Peter K. Yu, Drake University Law School

Innovation and Patents

Petra Moser, Stanford University - Department of Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

Multipolarity, Intellectual Property, and the Internationalization of Public Health Law

Sam Halabi, University of Tulsa College of Law

'Whose' Game Is It? Sports-Wagering and Intellectual Property

Ryan M. Rodenberg, Florida State University
Anastasios Kaburakis, Saint Louis University - John Cook School of Business - Department of Management
John T. Holden, Florida State University

Editorial Notes

ERPN is sponsored by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and will provide an online community for entrepreneurship research from all academic disciplines and the users of that information. SSRN is very pleased to be working with the Kauffman Foundation in this important and growing area of scholarship. In addition to sponsoring the network, Robert Strom, Research and Policy Director at the Kauffman Foundation, will serve as the Network Director and the Foundation is graciously providing free ERPN subscriptions to U.S. universities and not-for-profit institutions for the first year. The list of institutions receiving free subscriptions is available at: If your institution is not listed and you would like to request a sponsored subscription, please reply to this email or write to: and include your institution name, URL, and a contact name.

Sponsored by the Kauffman Foundation

"How Copyright Law May Affect Pop Music Without Our Knowing it" Free Download
UMKC Law Review, Vol. 83, 2014

PETER K. YU, Drake University Law School

Commissioned for a symposium on copyright law and the creation of music, this article explores five questions about popular music that can be illuminated by greater insights into copyright law and the music business. Why do popular songs usually last for fewer than five minutes? Why are professional songwriters dissatisfied with Pandora and Spotify? Why can we bring European CDs back to the United States? Why can't YouTube videos be created with ASCAP/BMI licenses? Are digital downloads sales or licenses? And as a bonus: Why did the royalty rate for sheet music stay at seven cents per copy?

It is my hope that answering these questions will enable us to develop a deeper understanding of copyright law and how it can affect popular music. The copyright debate has been repeatedly and frequently framed as one among the different stakeholders. However, what laws we include in Title 17 of the United States Code will ultimately affect our music, both directly and indirectly. The more we understand the laws' impact on the music business — and culture in general — the more we will notice the high cultural stakes involved in copyright law reform.

"Innovation and Patents" Free Download
Book chapter prepared for Louis Cain, Price Fishback, and Paul Rhode (editors) Oxford Handbook of Economic History, Forthcoming

PETRA MOSER, Stanford University - Department of Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

This chapter summarizes historical evidence on the link between patent laws and innovation. Earlier historical analyses have emphasized the importance of patent laws in encouraging innovation. Data on exhibits at international technology fairs, such as the 1851 Crystal Palace world’s fair, however, indicate that only a small share of innovations are patented and that non-patent mechanisms may play an important role in encouraging innovation. They also show that inventors’ dependency on patents varies strongly across industries, so that radical changes in patent laws may influence the direction if not the level of technical change. Exhibition data also indicate that patents may play an important role in facilitating encouraging the diffusion of innovative activity by encouraging inventors to advertise their ideas. These results highlight the need for additional analyses of innovation that systematically analyze patents and alternative measures of innovation.

"Multipolarity, Intellectual Property, and the Internationalization of Public Health Law" Free Download
Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 35, 2014

SAM HALABI, University of Tulsa College of Law

This Article critically examines the proliferation of international legal agreements addressing global health threats like the outbreak of infectious diseases, tobacco use and lack of access to affordable medicines. The conventional wisdom behind this trend is that a global normative shift has occurred which has caused states to regard health as “special? and less subject to the normal rules of international law making because health threats endanger all of humanity. This Article challenges that thesis, arguing that at the same time the number and scope of international health law treaties has grown, developed states have subordinated health law to intellectual property protection for patents and trademarks, both of which erect substantial barriers to the objectives of public health law treaties. To the extent international health law has generated meaningful gains for global population health, it has not done so through a normative shift in how diplomacy works, but precisely because of politics as usual. International public health law gains have come largely from the efforts of an emerging group of middle-income, influential states like Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa and Thailand who have sufficient weight to force concessions from wealthier states. Using the parallel histories of international intellectual property treaties and global public health law, the Article demonstrates that the normative force of health-based arguments is relatively weak. To the extent public health advocates urge the adoption of more treaties, as they are now poised to do, they must more squarely address the threat posed by international intellectual property protection and make strategic calculations as to the political feasibility of those agreements given the changing distribution of global economic and political power.

"'Whose' Game Is It? Sports-Wagering and Intellectual Property" Free Download
Villanova Law Review -- Tolle Lege, Vol. 60, No. 1, 2014
FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 710

RYAN M. RODENBERG, Florida State University
ANASTASIOS KABURAKIS, Saint Louis University - John Cook School of Business - Department of Management
JOHN T. HOLDEN, Florida State University

In 1992, Congress passed the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), a statute designed to prevent the further spread of state-sponsored sports-wagering. The statute’s language has the effect of granting a property right to sports leagues, implicating the Constitution’s Intellectual Property Clause. The Intellectual Property Clause grants Congress the authority: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.?

In 2012, Major League Baseball (MLB), the National Football League (NFL), the National Basketball Association (NBA), the National Hockey League (NHL), and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) (collectively “Sports Leagues?) brought suit against New Jersey Governor Chris Christie seeking an injunction under PASPA to prevent the state from offering regulated sports-wagering. The Department of Justice (DOJ) eventually joined the Sports Leagues as an intervenor. The matter was eventually appealed to the Third Circuit where a divided court ruled 2-1 in favor of the Sports Leagues.

PASPA’s section 3703 — labeled “Injunctions? — includes the word “whose,? which confers the ownership rights of “competitive game[s]? to the Sports Leagues for enforcement purposes under the statute. This semantic choice, with the determinant word “whose,? confers ownership rights of “competitive game[s]? to the Sports Leagues, as well as other professional or amateur sports organizations, deputizing them to enforce the law in the same manner as the DOJ.

PASPA violates the Intellectual Property Clause for two distinct reasons. First, the express grant of perpetual ownership rights with characteristics mimicking both patents and copyrights runs counter to various prongs of the Intellectual Property Clause, including the “limited Times,? “Authors and Inventors,? and “Writings and Discoveries? requirements. Second, conferring perpetual property rights to states exempted under PASPA’s grandfathering provision violates the Intellectual Property Clause’s “limited Times? requirement. The focus of this paper is on the former.


About this eJournal

Sponsored by the Kauffman Foundation

This eJournal distributes working paper and accepted paper abstracts in subject matters that concern how the law, broadly conceived, impacts entrepreneurship, small business, growth companies, entrepreneurship within large companies, and innovation policy generally.

The eJournal welcomes research not only on topics of regulation and public policy, but also the law of contracts, contract design, and informal relationships and networks that affect entrepreneurs and may substitute for legal contracts. Topic areas include contract design, judicial interpretation and enforcement of contracts, corporate law, partnership law and choice of entity, family businesses, franchising and joint ventures, intellectual property and licensing, small business regulation, securities law, bankruptcy, and social responsibility and sustainability. The Journal welcomes submissions from scholars in finance, economics, sociology, and other disciplines as well as legal scholars.

Editor: Victor Fleischer, University of San Diego


To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.

Distribution Services

If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email:

Distributed by

Entrepreneurship Research & Policy Network (ERPN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)



Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation

Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for ERPN-Sub.