<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tushnet on Copyright&#8217;s Privileging of Transgressive Fair Use</title>
	<atom:link href="http://madisonian.net/2006/10/07/tushnet-on-copyrights-privileging-of-transgressive-fair-use/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://madisonian.net/2006/10/07/tushnet-on-copyrights-privileging-of-transgressive-fair-use/</link>
	<description>a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:06:26 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: madisonian.net &#187; Celebrity Rights Management</title>
		<link>http://madisonian.net/2006/10/07/tushnet-on-copyrights-privileging-of-transgressive-fair-use/comment-page-1/#comment-84576</link>
		<dc:creator>madisonian.net &#187; Celebrity Rights Management</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:02:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://madisonian.net/?p=834#comment-84576</guid>
		<description>[...] King and Parks strike me as &#8220;public figures,&#8221; whose works or lives should be open to inspire all. But on the other hand, should law be creating explicit economic incentives to build &#8220;celebrity,&#8221; but fail to give IP rights to these figures, who&#8217;ve done a lot more to promote justice than, say, James Dean? This paradox reminds me of Tushnet&#8217;s recent talk on fair use doctrine&#8217;s apparent privileging of transgressive (and even misogynistic) uses over more conventional ones. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] King and Parks strike me as &#8220;public figures,&#8221; whose works or lives should be open to inspire all. But on the other hand, should law be creating explicit economic incentives to build &#8220;celebrity,&#8221; but fail to give IP rights to these figures, who&#8217;ve done a lot more to promote justice than, say, James Dean? This paradox reminds me of Tushnet&#8217;s recent talk on fair use doctrine&#8217;s apparent privileging of transgressive (and even misogynistic) uses over more conventional ones. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
