J. Remy's guest appearances

J. Remy

Ipse Dixit

Voice Cry Music

John Newman

Tim Schneider

Eric Goldman

Carrie Goldberg

Lawrence Lessig

Nicholas Bagley

Heidi Matthews

Leigh Goodmark

Todd Zywicki

Simon Tam

Greg Shill

Adam Winkler

Patrick O'Donnell

David Ley

Ben Carter

OwlTail

In this episode, J. Remy Green, a partner at Cohen &amp; Green PLLC and a teacher at Boston University Law and Baruch College at the City University of New York, and Austin A. Baker, a postdoctoral assistant professor at the Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, discuss their article "There is No Such Thing as a Legal Name: A Strange, Shared Delusion." They begin by explaining how there is no universal definition of a "legal name," even though most people and institutions assume there is. They describe the different ways that the law uses names. And they argue that the law can and does allow people to use the names they want. They also reflect on the harms caused by refusing to use someone's correct name. Green is on Twitter at @j_remy_green, and Baker is at @AustinACBaker.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, <a href="https://femmelaw.com/menu" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">J. Remy Green</a>, a partner at Cohen &amp; Green PLLC and a teacher at <a href="https://www.bu.edu/law/profile/remy-green/#:~:text=Remy%20Green%20is%20a%20founding,rights%20and%20First%20Amendment%20cases.&amp;text=Green%20has%20published%20full%2Dlength,eclectic%20array%20of%20other%20topics." rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Boston University Law</a> and Baruch College at the City University of New York, and <a href="https://ruccs.rutgers.edu/148-people/post-docs/8-post-docs" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Austin A. Baker</a>, a postdoctoral assistant professor at the Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, discuss their article "There is No Such Thing as a Legal Name: A Strange, Shared Delusion." They begin by explaining how there is no universal definition of a "legal name," even though most people and institutions assume there is. They describe the different ways that the law uses names. And they argue that the law can and does allow people to use the names they want. They also reflect on the harms caused by refusing to use someone's correct name. Green is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/j_remy_green" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@j_remy_green</a>, and Baker is at <a href="https://twitter.com/AustinACBaker" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@AustinACBaker</a>.This episode was hosted by <a href="http://law.uky.edu/directory/brian-l-frye" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Brian L. Frye</a>, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/brianlfrye" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@brianlfrye</a>. Hosted on Acast. See <a href="https://acast.com/privacy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">acast.com/privacy</a> for more information.

J. Remy Green & Austin A. Baker on Names

Ike Hil

B. Meads

No Problems - JustHis League (ft). Cutright, Ike Hil, Chosen, D. Jax, Phresh, J. Remy and B. Meads

In this episode, J. Remy Green, a partner at Cohen &amp; Green PLLC, discusses their article "All Your Works Are Belong to Us: New Frontiers for the Derivative Work Right in Video Games," which is published in the North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology. Green begins by explaining how copyright doctrine conceptualizes videogames as audiovisual works. But they observe that videogame players can use videogames to create new works of authorship. They present four paradigms for such works and discuss how each should be conceptualized. And they provide a model for thinking about when, why, and how copyright should protect derivative works based on videogames. Green is on Twitter at @j_remy_green.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Associate Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, J. Remy Green, a partner at <a href="https://femmelaw.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Cohen &amp; Green PLLC</a>, discusses their article "<a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3161778" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">All Your Works Are Belong to Us: New Frontiers for the Derivative Work Right in Video Games</a>," which is published in the North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology. Green begins by explaining how copyright doctrine conceptualizes videogames as audiovisual works. But they observe that videogame players can use videogames to create new works of authorship. They present four paradigms for such works and discuss how each should be conceptualized. And they provide a model for thinking about when, why, and how copyright should protect derivative works based on videogames. Green is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/j_remy_green" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@j_remy_green</a>.This episode was hosted by <a href="http://law.uky.edu/directory/brian-l-frye" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Brian L. Frye</a>, Spears-Gilbert Associate Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/brianlfrye" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@brianlfrye</a>. Hosted on Acast. See <a href="https://acast.com/privacy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">acast.com/privacy</a> for more information.

J. Remy Green on Copyright in Videogames

In this episode, J. Remy Green, a partner at Cohen &amp; Green PLLC, discusses their article “Digitizing Brandenburg: Common Law Drift Toward a Causal Theory of Imminence,” which is published in the Syracuse Law Review. Green begins by discussing imminence as it has been applied since the pivotal U.S. Supreme Court case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, and how imminence has been conceptualized in a spatiotemporal manner. They continue by noting the uneven and unpredictable application of imminence by courts, arguing that the current system is unsustainable. Noting that the current moment of Brandenburg jurisprudence is ripe for common law innovation, Green proposes using a causal theory of imminence.Green then explores the underlying First Amendment theory for speech restrictions and briefly discusses market failures in the “marketplace of ideas.” They also note a hypothetical “entrapment machine” presented by Judge Richard Posner and its relationship to the theory of imminence through analogy. They conclude by discussing the application of the causal theory of imminence in the real world and provides insights for students, scholars, and policymakers. They are on Twitter at @j_remy_green.This episode was hosted by Luce Nguyen. She is on Twitter at @NguyenLuce. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, J. Remy Green, a partner at <a href="https://femmelaw.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Cohen &amp; Green PLLC</a>, discusses their article “<a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3169952" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Digitizing Brandenburg: Common Law Drift Toward a Causal Theory of Imminence</a>,” which is published in the Syracuse Law Review. Green begins by discussing imminence as it has been applied since the pivotal U.S. Supreme Court case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, and how imminence has been conceptualized in a spatiotemporal manner. They continue by noting the uneven and unpredictable application of imminence by courts, arguing that the current system is unsustainable. Noting that the current moment of Brandenburg jurisprudence is ripe for common law innovation, Green proposes using a causal theory of imminence.Green then explores the underlying First Amendment theory for speech restrictions and briefly discusses market failures in the “marketplace of ideas.” They also note a hypothetical “entrapment machine” presented by Judge Richard Posner and its relationship to the theory of imminence through analogy. They conclude by discussing the application of the causal theory of imminence in the real world and provides insights for students, scholars, and policymakers. They are on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/j_remy_green" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@j_remy_green</a>.This episode was hosted by Luce Nguyen. She is on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/NguyenLuce" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">@NguyenLuce</a>. Hosted on Acast. See <a href="https://acast.com/privacy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">acast.com/privacy</a> for more information.

J. Remy Green on Imminence in First Amendment Jurisprudence