Amicus Brief

On behalf of three nonprofit organizations, the Samuelson Clinic drafted and filed an amicus brief highlighting the importance of preserving long-standing reader privacy protections in the digital age. Reader privacy, critical to democratic participation, has long been safeguarded by libraries but is under threat by commercial e-book vendors’ intensive tracking of readers’ habits.

On behalf of intellectual property law professors, the Samuelson Clinic drafted and filed an amicus brief explaining why the noncommercial reproduction of privately developed standards incorporated by reference into federal regulations is fair use.

On behalf of library associations, the Samuelson Clinic drafted and filed an amicus brief explaining the role of the Copyright Act's deposit requirement in supporting the mission of the Library of Congress and the purposes of copyright.

On behalf of professors Rebecca Tushnet (Harvard Law) and Pam Samuelson (Berkeley Law), the clinic helped to draft an amicus brief in Green v. DOJ. The brief argues that the DC Circuit should hold that Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act should be subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment. Section 1201 blocks access to information and alters the traditional balance between copyright law and free speech. Content-based exceptions, both in 1201 itself and through the triennial review process created by Section 1201, mean the court should subject the statute to strict scrutiny.

Amicus briefs on behalf of Consumers Union.

Amicus briefs filed on behalf of Google in Kelly v. Arriba Soft.

Two Supreme Court amicus briefs filed in Eldred v. Ashcroft.

Amicus brief filed on behalf of the Internet Archive, various library associations, and the Society of American Archivists arguing that preserving ephemeral media and making television content available for public access constitutes fair use and promotes public discourse and political accountability.

On behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Samuelson Clinic co-authored an amicus brief urging the Fourth Circuit to consider the interests of innocent users at risk of losing all access to the internet in the court's review of a $1 billion damage award against an internet service provider for facilitating copyright infringement.