Ipse Dixit

In this episode, Kurt Schneider, former CEO of the Harlem Globetrotters, entrepreneur, and host of the Smart Drivel podcast, discusses the entertainment industry, his experiences working with lawyers, and his love of martinis. Schneider begins by explaining his background in the entertainment industry at Disney, WWE, and the Harlem Globetrotters, among other companies. He reflects on his experiences working with lawyers, including when they were helpful or not so helpful, and what he looked for in a lawyer. He discusses how entertainment industry executives think about intellectual property. And he explains why a gin martini with a twist is the perfect cocktail. Schneider is on Twitter at @KurtMSchneider8.This episode was hosted byBrian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at@brianlfrye.

In this episode, Amy Cyphert, Lecturer in Law and Director of the ASPIRE Office at the West Virginia University College of Law, discusses her article "Reprogramming Recidivism: The First Step Act and Algorithmic Prediction of Risk," which is published in the Seton Hall Law Review. Cyphert begins by explaining how the First Step Act changed the way the Department of Justice makes decisions about when to release particular people from federal prison, including in response to the COVID pandemic. Specifically, she discusses the new PATTERN system, which provides a framework for placing people in different risk categories, based on both static and dynamic features. She observes that it may be an improvement on previous, more subjective methods, but still lacks the transparency necessary to evaluate it for accuracy and bias. She argues that it is a good first step, but more steps are needed. Cyphert is on Twitter at @CyphertAmy.This episode was hosted byBrian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at@brianlfrye.

In this episode, Cathay Y. N. Smith, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Montana Blewett School of Law, discusses her new article "Weaponizing Copyright." Smith begins by explaining that "weaponizing" copyright is using it for non-copyright ends. In theory, copyright is supposed to be about ensuring that copyright owners reap the economic value of the works they own. But sometimes, copyright owners use their copyright to accomplish non-economic goals. Often, those goals are laudable, like punishing racist speech or removing revenge porn from the internet. But they can also be bad, especially when they involve the suppression of critical speech. Smith reflects on that tension and how it might be resolved, through the lens of many different examples. Smith is on Twitter at @CathaySmith.This episode was hosted byBrian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at@brianlfrye.

In this episode, Evan Bernick, Executive Director of the Georgetown Center for the Constitution and Visiting Professor of Law at Georgetown, discusses his article "Constitutional Hedging." Bernick begins by explaining that "constitutional hedging" is when judges consider the merits and demerits of multiple theories of constitutional interpretation when deciding how to answer a question, rather than pre-committing to one preferred theory. He describes how judges might engage in constitutional hedging, and observes that it may be a more systematic version of how many judges already answer constitutional questions. He also reflects on how constitutional hedging squares with different normative theories of law, as well as legal realism. Bernick is on Twitter at @evanbernick.This episode was hosted byBrian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at@brianlfrye.

In this episode, J. Remy Green, a partner at Cohen & 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 byBrian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at@brianlfrye.

In this episode, Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law, discusses the history of his professional career and the relationship between his art practice and his legal scholarship. Among other things he reflects on how he became interested in the law and how he became a copyright scholar. He explains how fair use could help art historians. And he he discusses his use of legal scholarship as a medium for conceptual art.This episode was hosted by Martha Buskirk, Professor of Art History and Criticism at Montserrat College of Art. Buskirk is on Twitter at @martha_buskirk.