Acknowledgments Introduction: "Worship at the Altar of Convergence": A New Paradigm for Understanding Media Change 1 Spoiling Survivor: The Anatomy of a Knowledge Community 2 Buying into American Idol: How We are Being Sold on Reality TV 3 Searching for the Origami Unicorn: The Matrix and Transmedia Storytelling 4 Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars? Grassroots Creativity Meets the Media Industry 5 Why Heather Can Write: Media Literacy and the Potter Wars 6 Photoshop for Democracy: The New Relationship between Politics and Popular CultureConclusion: Democratizing Television?The Politics of ParticipationNotes Glossary Index About the Author

/pdf/convergence-culture-where-old-and-new-media-collide-1ms9g8qkwh.pdf

Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide

This chapter contains section titled: Patterns of Inclusion, Cycles of Anticipation, The Evaluation of Relevance, The Promise of Algorithmic Objectivity, Entanglement with Practice, The Production of Calculated Publics, Conclusion, Acknowledgments, Notes

/pdf/the-relevance-of-algorithms-3kslccydqd.pdf

The Relevance of Algorithms

Harmful lies are nothing new But the ability to distort reality has taken an exponential leap forward with “deep fake” technology This capability makes it possible to create audio and video of real people saying and doing things they never said or did Machine learning techniques are escalating the technology’s sophistication, making deep fakes ever more realistic and increasingly resistant to detection Deep-fake technology has characteristics that enable rapid and widespread diffusion, putting it into the hands of both sophisticated and unsophisticated actors While deep-fake technology will bring with it certain benefits, it also will introduce many harms The marketplace of ideas already suffers from truth decay as our networked information environment interacts in toxic ways with our cognitive biases Deep fakes will exacerbate this problem significantly Individuals and businesses will face novel forms of exploitation, intimidation, and personal sabotage The risks to our democracy and to national security are profound as well Our aim is to provide the first in-depth assessment of the causes and consequences of this disruptive technological change, and to explore the existing and potential tools for responding to it We survey a broad array of responses, including: the role of technological solutions; criminal penalties, civil liability, and regulatory action; military and covert-action responses; economic sanctions; and market developments We cover the waterfront from immunities to immutable authentication trails, offering recommendations to improve law and policy and anticipating the pitfalls embedded in various solutions

/pdf/deep-fakes-a-looming-challenge-for-privacy-democracy-and-1edk57fwc6.pdf

Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security

The flag is now a common mechanism for reporting offensive content to an online platform, and is used widely across most popular social media sites. It serves both as a solution to the problem of curating massive collections of user-generated content and as a rhetorical justification for platform owners when they decide to remove content. Flags are becoming a ubiquitous mechanism of governance—yet their meaning is anything but straightforward. In practice, the interactions between users, flags, algorithms, content moderators, and platforms are complex and highly strategic. Significantly, flags are asked to bear a great deal of weight, arbitrating both the relationship between users and platforms, and the negotiation around contentious public issues. In this essay, we unpack the working of the flag, consider alternatives that give greater emphasis to public deliberation, and consider the implications for online public discourse of this now commonplace yet rarely studied sociotechnical mechanism.

/pdf/what-is-a-flag-for-social-media-reporting-tools-and-the-h9hapncwj8.pdf

What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint

Evidence discussed in this article indicates that consumers rely heavily upon consumer reviews when making decisions about which products and services to purchase online Sellers and their marketeers are aware of this, and as a result, some of them succumb to the temptation to generate fake consumer reviews This article argues that policymakers and regulators need to take fake reviews seriously This is because they undermine a (potentially) effective and efficient mechanism for overcoming information asymmetry between online sellers and buyers Consumer reviews also offer a powerful mechanism for regulating the marketplace Sellers who sell sub-standard products or engage in sub-standard selling practices risk reputational damage Genuine consumer reviews can therefore moder- ate bad seller behaviour and assist in improving the quality and efficiency of the market- place Although there are laws in many jurisdictions that prohibit misleading and deceptive conduct, detecting fake reviews is complex and difficult This article proposes that one way of increasing the effectiveness of regulatory oversight is for regulators to add an "alliance approach" to their existing arsenal of regulatory systems and mechanisms

Taking Fake Online Consumer Reviews Seriously

/pdf/legal-fictions-copyright-fan-fiction-and-a-new-common-law-5f4onx6cwb.pdf

Legal Fictions: Copyright, Fan Fiction, and a New Common Law

Defenders of transformative uses have invoked the First Amendment to bolster claims that such uses should not be subject to the copyright owner’s permission. But this focus on transformation is critically incomplete, leaving unchallenged much of copyright’s scope, despite the large number of nontransformative copying activities that are also instances of free speech. The current debate leaves the way open for expansions of copyright that, while not targeted at dissenting viewpoints, nonetheless may have a profoundly negative effect on freedom of speech. In other words, transformation has limited our thinking about the free speech interests implicated by copying. This essay discusses the free speech value of pure copying, from audience interests to speaker interests in self-expression, persuasion, and affirmation of connection with a larger political, religious, or cultural group.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1793181_code333387.pdf?abstractid=1793181&mirid=1&type=2

Copy this Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It

I. OVERVIEW: THE FIRST AMENDMENT, COPYRIGHT, AND THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THEM 538 A. What Free Speech Is For 538 B. Copyright and Fair Use 540 C. The First Amendment Value of Copying 545

/pdf/copy-this-essay-how-fair-use-doctrine-harms-free-speech-and-3llsppv130.pdf

Copy This Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It

Trademark dilution is a cause of action for interfering with the uniqueness of a trademark. For example, consumers would probably not think that "Kodak soap" was produced by the makers of Kodak cameras, but its presence in the market would diminish the uniqueness of the original Kodak mark. Trademark owners think dilution is harmful but have had difficulty explaining why. Many courts have therefore been reluctant to enforce dilution laws, even while legislatures have enacted more of them over the past half century. Courts and commentators have now begun to use psychological theories, drawing on associationist models of cognition, to explain how a trademark can be harmed by the existence of similar marks even when consumers can readily distinguish the marks from one another and thus are not confused. Though the cognitive theory of dilution is internally consistent and appeals to the authority of science, it does not rest on sufficient empirical evidence to justify its adoption. Moreover, the harms it identifies do not generally come from commercial competitors but from free speech about trademarked products. As a result, even a limited dilution law should be held unconstitutional under current First Amendment commercial-speech doctrine. In the absence of constitutional invalidation, the cognitive explanation of dilution is likely to change the law for the worse. Rather than working like fingerprint evidence-which ideally produces more evidence about already-defined crimes-psychological explanations of dilution are more like economic theories in antitrust, which changed the definition of actionable restraints of trade. Given the empirical and normative flaws in the cognitive theory, using it to fill dilution's theoretical vacuum would be a mistake. I. Introduction Law attempts to shape human behavior and therefore can benefit from behavioral science. Psychology and economics can clarify legal concepts like intent and damages, and can predict the consequences of various regulatory regimes, guiding lawmakers as they seek specific goals. But jurists and legislators must be aware of the limits of science. Laboratory results may not reflect real-world experience. And even the most thorough model of behavior cannot tell us what laws are just. Cognitive science is especially attractive to trademark law because trademark protection is premised on a psychological assumption: exposure to a mark will trigger ideas and emotions in the mind of a consumer. Traditionally, trademark law has measured these responses through circumstantial evidence and consumer-response surveys, but in recent years, research advances have promised to replace intuitions, whether courts' or consumers', with hard facts. Neuromarketing, the investigation of marketing and branding techniques through observation of brain activity rather than consumer selfreports, is the most recent contender in the search for greater understanding of consumer behavior. Among other things, it illuminates the common wisdom that first impressions are cmcial. Researchers can now establish that it only takes fifty milliseconds-a twentieth of a second-for consumers to form opinions about Web sites.1 Once such an opinion is formed, cognitive biases make it easier for consumers to keep believing than to change their minds.2 Neuromarketing also appeals to the idea that there is an objective truth behind intangible brand values.3 It's well known that people like Pepsi better than Coke until they know what it is they're drinking, at which point preferences shift to Coke. Part of what people are drinking is the trademark. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) shows that different areas in the brain light up in blinded versus nonblinded taste tests.4 Positive associations with the brand change the experience of tasting soda, evoking memories along with immediate sensory impressions.5 Neuroscience thus promises to explain why we buy and to give advertisers information about consumers' brains that consumers themselves don't know. …

/pdf/gone-in-sixty-milliseconds-trademark-law-and-cognitive-x7w6ugw5ea.pdf

Gone in Sixty Milliseconds: Trademark Law and Cognitive Science

Copyright lawyers talk and write a lot about the uncertainties of fair use and the deterrent effects of a clearance culture on publishers, teachers, filmmakers, and the like, but we know less about the choices people make about copyright on a daily basis, especially when they are not at work. Thus, this article examines one subcultural group that engages in a variety of practices, from pure copying and distribution of others' works to creation of new stories, art, and audiovisual works: the media-fan community. Fans justify their unauthorized derivative works as legitimate, no matter what formal copyright law says, with theories that draw on factors similar to those employed by fair use doctrine, but fan practices differ in significant ways from copyright law's assumptions, especially in their treatment of attribution as a substitute for compensation and control. The article concludes by discussing the rise of hybrid forms of partially or incompletely commodified, unauthorized but tolerated, creative production; these new forms challenge both conventional production models and traditionally noncommercial fan practices.

Rebecca Tushnet

Papers

Legal Fictions: Copyright, Fan Fiction, and a New Common Law

Copy this Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It

Copy This Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It

Gone in Sixty Milliseconds: Trademark Law and Cognitive Science

Payment in Credit: Copyright Law and Subcultural Creativity