You are on page 1of 6

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

Political Science 179 Winter 2012 Tuesday 7:00-9:50pm Humanities Hall [HH] #178

http://eee.uci.edu/12w/67540
Professor S.K. Sellgren (S.Sellgren@uci.edu) Office Hours: Thursday 7:00-8:00pm Office Hours meet in: Social Science Tower [SST] #546 Teaching Assistant Josh Gellers ( j g e l l e r s @ u c i . e d u ) Office: Social Science Tower [SST] #665 Office Hours: ______________________

CYBER-SPEECH, GAMING & LAW


This course explores the impact of importing pre-existing legal doctrine into new and unique areas of creative expression, such as cyberspace and the ever-expanding video game market. Particular topics of discussion will include: (a) efforts to promote the progress of useful arts through copyright protection; and (b) simultaneous efforts to protect vulnerable classes of citizens, such as children, by limiting these rapidly-evolving forms of expression in a manner that comports with or perhaps redefines (?) traditional notions of free speech. COURSE REQUIREMENTS Class Format: Attendance at all class sessions is expected for this course. Most class sessions will be devoted to a mixture of lecture and discussion regarding assigned reading materials. Lecture attendance will not be recorded; however, exam coverage is tied directly to the material covered during class. There is no make-up for anything covered during these general class sessions. Some class sessions will be devoted to in-class debate as a form of interactive review. Those students who volunteer and are selected to present oral arguments during in-class debates may receive bonus credit. Failure by any class member to attend these in-class debates and submit thoughtful voting sheets will result in a grading penalty. Make-up options are available for in-class debates, but only under very limited circumstances (see following pages for details). Expectations: 1. 2. 3.

Reading assignments should be completed prior to class meetings. Class members are encouraged to take an active, participatory role in class discussions and debates. Random quizzes may be administered during class if a significant number of class members are unprepared to discuss the assigned readings. The instructor has discretion to take these quizzes into account for grading purposes.

Grading: The following weight will be given to the coursework in the determination of final grades: In-class Midterm Essay Exam (30%) In-class Final Essay Exam (60%) Class Participation (section, game, debates etc.) (10%) Course Materials: The required coursepacket will be available directly from the publisher during the first week of class. If you miss the in-class distribution, express shipping is available through www.AristoText.com . All other required readings will be posted on the course website. Course Website: All class members are responsible for visiting the "schedule" section of the course website on a regular basis. The attached reading list provides a general guide to the course readings; however, the actual assignment list and any updates will be posted on the course website.
1

CYBER-SPEECH, GAMING & LAW


Topics and Readings The following reading list is provided as a general guide to the assigned topics and readings for this course. Consult the course website on a regular basis for specific daily reading assignments. From time to time, the professor may add additional reading material or provide links to recommended (optional) readings of further interest. I. STATUTORY RESTRICTIONS ON FREE EXPRESSION A. Free Speech vs. Unprotected Speech Miller v. California (1973) (obscenity) EMA et al. v. Schwarzenegger/Brown (2010-11) (violent video games) B. Regulating Speech: Compelling Interests Reno v. ACLU (1997) (CDA case) ACLU v. Reno (3rd Cir. 2000) (COPA case) EMA et al. v. Schwarzenegger/Brown (2010-11) (violent video games) C. Regulating Speech: Narrow Tailoring Reno v. ACLU (1997) (CDA case) ACLU v. Reno (3rd Cir. 2000) (COPA case) EMA et al. v. Schwarzenegger/Brown (2010-11) (violent video games) -- In-class Midterm Essay Exam (open book) -II. COPYRIGHT & PROTECTABLE EXPRESSION A. B. Introduction to Ideas vs. Expression Example: The Atari cases Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc. (D.Md. 1981) Atari, Inc. v. North American Philips Consumer Electronics Corp. (7th Cir. 1982) III. CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT & COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT A. B. C. D. IV. Story & Setting Thematic Elements Music & Lyrics Compilations & Derivatives

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT vs. FAIR USE A. B. C. Introduction to the Fair Use Defense Fair Use & Form (Parody cases) Fair Use & Function (eCommerce cases) -- In-class Final Essay Exam (open book) --

COURSE PROCEDURES Class Announcements: Check your UCI email account on a regular basis for any announcements from the professor or TA concerning this class. If you have trouble accessing your UCI email account, a link to the archive of class email announcements can be found on the course website (see top of first page for website URL address). Questions via Email: Your Teaching Assistant [TA] is your contact for all email questions regarding this class. Direct all email messages to your TA; s/he will answer your question and/or contact the professor and get back to you. Please raise all questions regarding the substance of the course material during class, section or office hours. Add/Drop: School of Social Science policies and deadlines for adding, dropping or changing grade options apply. *See the Registrars website for current campuswide add/drop policies and procedures. Attendance: Attendance will not be recorded in lecture; however, you will be responsible for all material provided in lecture and assigned readings. Make-up lectures are not available, so consider getting to know your classmates early in the quarter as a back-up resource. Attendance at scheduled discussion sections (see course website) will be recorded. Anyone causing disruption in class or in section will be instructed to leave immediately: no exceptions. Recording Policy: Electronic recording of class sessions and discussion sections is not permitted. All written instructional material shared with the class (handouts, slides, etc.) remains the instructors intellectual property, offered for personal educational use only, and cannot be copied or distributed to any other party without permission. Classroom Electronics: Cell phones must be turned off during class. Computers can distract everyone in the room, and will be permitted during class for note-taking purposes only. If anyone notices a computer used for any other reason during class, you will be instructed to turn it off immediately and work without it in the future. In-Class Debates: Based on demonstrated preparation, the TA will select class members who are interested in participating as advocates during a class debate for possible extra credit. All other class members will raise questions and then vote at the end of the debate (voting forms online; only fill out the top half prior to the debate). Debate votes should be submitted to your TA at the end of each debate for class participation credit. Course Evaluations: Completion of electronic evaluations for the professor/TA will also be recorded for course participation credit. Watch carefully for Counseling Office email notice near the end of the quarter; no evaluation credit can be given after the electronic evaluation deadline has passed. Case Briefs: See the following section of this syllabus for a discussion of the required case brief format. Case briefs will not be collected during this course (with the exception of make-up assignments; see below). However, case briefs are highly recommended as a study tool. You will be expected to bring case briefs when seeking additional assistance from the professor or TA during office hours. Excused Absences: An absence from an in-class debate, assigned discussion section or exam will only be excusable (i.e., subject to make-up) with written documentation of an extreme illness (i.e., doctor confirms you were absolutely unable to attend school that day) or a death in the immediate family (parent, sibling or child). Documentation of these situations must be presented to the TA within one week of the absence. Make-up credit for a discussion section or in-class debate vote will consist of a pre-arranged case brief on a case selected by the TA. Be sure to keep your own extra copy of the brief as well. Make-up exams may take the form of alternate exams or research papers, at the instructors discretion. *A make-up final exam is only offered if you have reported your documented emergency, via email (to S.Sellgren@uci.edu) and phone message (Ms. Martin at 949-824-1763), prior to start of the exam. Academic Honesty: Students found to be guilty of plagiarism or cheating as defined by official university policy will automatically receive a grade of F in the course. Other actions consistent with university policy may be taken where deemed appropriate. Proper citation to assigned cases (case name and page number from coursepacket) is required for direct quotes. See link on course website for academic honesty details..
3

FORMAT GUIDELINES GENERAL STANDARDS All work will be graded "blindly." Do not include your name on assignments or exams; only your UCI ID#. Be sure to keep an extra copy of any make-up case briefs (if applicable) for your own use.

"CASE BRIEF" Case briefs should be treated as a tool for review of the assigned case opinion, with emphasis placed on a summary of the legal reasoning involved. The case brief should include a Header (case name, court designation and opinion date) along with the following numbered sections: 1. Parties Designation of parties (plaintiff and defendant at the original, trial court level). In other words, who has come before the court seeking legal relief (plaintiff), and whom has the plaintiff asked the court to hold accountable for providing this relief (defendant)? 2. Issue Presented Stated in the form of a 1-sentence, yes/no question: What has the court been asked to decide? Keep this issue statement brief; however, include enough facts to remind yourself of the specific situations in which the court's ruling will (and will not) apply. 3. Holding What was the outcome of the case? (i.e., the answer to the question above) A simple yes or no will often suffice, although some prefer to add a brief explanatory parenthetical here. 4. Key Facts Summarize (in the form of a bulleted list) the most essential facts of the case. Look for particular facts that must be proven in order to meet the elements of the plaintiffs legal claims, or those that make a significant difference in the way you would analyze the case. 5. Legal Reasoning This is the heart of your brief, often taking up as much space as the other elements combined: Begin with a clear statement of the appropriate "legal standard" (rule of law or legal test). Summarize the process by which the court analyzed whether this legal standard had been met; i.e., how did the court apply the facts to the requirements of this legal standard? Wrap up this section of the brief with a clear statement of the resulting legal conclusion. (Keep in mind that during the process of "interpreting" the law, the court may have "enhanced" the legal standard by adding new depth to its components. If so, it is also important to identify any such evolution of the legal standard.) 6. Concurrence and/or Dissent (often not applicable) Briefly summarize the alternative legal reasoning found in any concurring (agree with holding) or dissenting (disagree with holding) opinions written by judges on the panel for the same opinion. Remember that a case brief represents a summary of the foregoing information. In most cases, the entire case brief should fit on one side of one page. A case brief that exceeds this limit is acceptable on occasion (e.g., opinions that include concurrence, dissent, multiple legal issues or compound legal reasoning), but should be avoided whenever possible. *Bear in mind that the legal reasoning section is the most important part of the entire brief.

EXAM POLICY & PROCEDURES Each essay exam (written analysis of a hypothetical case) is designed to achieve the following goals: 1. 2. 3. 4. Test your understanding of the legal reasoning used in the assigned cases, Test your ability to apply similar legal reasoning to a new situation, Test your ability to recognize multiple points of view as you formulate your analysis, and Test your ability to defend (and clearly articulate) your analysis.

In other words, this is an examination of comprehension (as opposed to memorization) as well as several forms of critical thinking and communication skills. Essay-writing tips will be provided during class and/or discussion section. Exam Day Procedures: All exams are administered in the main classroom. Bring 2 large (8.5 x 11") unmarked bluebooks and several blue or black pens to each exam; all essays must be written in ink.. Midterm exam (open book): See the course website for the midterm exam date. Final exam (open book): See the Registrars published schedule for the final exam date. For open book exams you may use the coursepacket, class handouts, lecture slides and your own personally authored notes or case briefs (no other materials). Personal Belongings During Exams: All personal belongings other than the items listed above (including cell phones and other electronics) must be placed either: (a) at the front of the classroom where they will not be retrieved until after you have submitted your exam, or (b) in a sealed backpack or bookbag under your seat, which will not be opened for any reason until after you have submitted your exam. Please note that items stored in the front of the room or under your seat are placed there at your own risk. Your exam proctor cannot supervise your belongings. Exam Accommodations: Only the campus Disability Services Center can authorize special accommodations to examination procedures. Class members are responsible for contacting Disability Services well in advance of scheduled exams and following all of the Centers procedures. Please bear in mind that the Center may not offer accommodations for reasonably foreseeable injuries due to high-risk physical activities: check their policies. Exam Retrieval: Your TA will return midterm exams during class or discussion section. If you are unavailable to pick up the exam when it is returned to the class, youll need to make special arrangements with your TA to pick it up at a later time. Roughly two weeks after course grades are posted, final exam bluebooks can be retrieved from Ms. Renee Martin (SSPA 3169) or Ms. Vicki Ronaldson (SSPA 3120) during weekday business hours. Grade Review Requests (Midterms): All concerns regarding grades received (or lack thereof) on written work must be raised within one week from the date that the work is returned to the class. To request a review of the grade received on written work: 1. Prepare a written argument (1 page) as to why the work might deserve a higher grade, with emphasis on the substance of the assignment rather than the amount of effort involved. 2. Submit this statement, along with the graded copy of the work, to the TA after class or during scheduled office hours (no later than one week following the date the work was returned to the class). Any change made to the grade will be final, even if the new grade is lower than the original grade, so weigh the use of this option carefully. Grade Review Requests (Final Exam): School policy does not allow for grade changes based on regrading of final exams. Grades can only be changed in the case of a record-keeping error. Overall course grades will be curved upward for the class whenever possible. Please do not ask for a grade change unless you have already retrieved your final exam and discovered a mathematical error in the calculation of your course grade.
5

EXAM FEEDBACK KEY The following key will help you decipher some of the comments on your exam. Please bear in mind that these comments are applied selectively rather than comprehensively. They are designed to give general feedback; they are not used to accumulate any sort of "points" for grading purposes. Legal Standard S1 = The relevant legal standard has been clearly identified and summarized before the legal analysis proceeds any further. Generally speaking, a "legal standard" is the applicable rule of law, legal test, or list of individual elements that must be proven. S2 = The relevant legal standard has been discussed somewhere in the midst of the analysis. S3 = The relevant legal standard is conspicuously missing. In other words, the analysis is proceeding in manner that suggests the writer may understand legal standard but it hasn't been clearly written it out for the reader's benefit. *Please keep in mind that one should never expect a reader to "fill in the gaps" in this manner. Further, given that papers are graded blindly, the grader cannot safely give the benefit of the doubt by assuming that the author understands the legal standard but has taken it for granted (i.e., failed to write it out). Case Precedent C1 = Strong use of outside case precedent in analyzing the current case. The cited case is clearly identified, the important facts of the cited case have been explained and compared to the facts of the current case, the legal reasoning used in the cited case has been summarized, and the relevance of the cited legal reasoning and its potential use for deciding the current case have been explained. C2 = Partial development of outside case precedent. Some, but not all, of the steps described above have been completed in a useful manner. C3 = Passing use of case precedent. An outside case has been identified and cited to prove a basic point, but the particular relevance of the outside case has not been fully explored. (This is perfectly acceptable when you want to back up a basic legal principle, but will not earn the same type of analytic credit as the fully developed case discussion described above.) *Please note, if you cite to cases other than those assigned as class readings, you must explain the case and establish its relevance in the manner described under "C1" above; failure to do so will result in a "Context?" comment. Application of Facts F1 = Strong use of pertinent facts when analyzing the ability (or failure) to meet the requirements of the legal standard. Facts aren't simply listed; the relevance of the given facts is also explored. F2 = Partial development of facts. At least some of the pertinent facts have been analyzed in the manner described above, or the pertinent facts have been identified but the discussion is not complete as to how those facts help to meet (or fail to meet) the requirements of the legal standard. F3 = An argument has been made that either conflicts with the facts or cries out for factual support that is not explicitly given. Legal Analysis Why? = This is the most important, and perhaps the most common, comment given during paper grading. It means that you haven't fully written out your thoughts with regard to areas such as the steps of your reasoning or the relevance/value of case precedents. *General tip: you can eliminate many of these comments by running the first and second drafts of your paper through your own "why" filter. Challenge yourself - see how many times you can fit in a "why" comment on each page of your paper. Then go back and make sure to answer those "why" questions before submitting your final draft. So? = This is the basic "so what?" question. It means that you haven't followed your reasoning or argument with a clear explanation of your conclusions (or sub-conclusions). It's basically the opposite of the "Why?" comment.
6

You might also like