25th Annual IPLJ Symposium - Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal
24548
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-24548,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,select-theme-ver-3.3,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.12,vc_responsive
 

25th Annual IPLJ Symposium

25th Annual IPLJ Symposium

Friday, February 9, 2018
9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.

 

Fordham University
McNally Amphitheater
140 W. 62nd Street
New York City

 

Register here

***REGISTRATION WILL END at 9:00 PM EST on Wednesday, February 7. For late registrations, please email [email protected].***

 

This year, IPLJ will focus on the values underlying our commitment to free speech, and the need to balance this fundamental right with civility and respect for human welfare. Our Symposium will examine the impact of freedom of expression on the media, and recent legal developments that test the boundaries of these protections. We will present a series of panel discussions on legal issues including: (1) European Union Comparative Law, (2) The Death of Political Neutrality in media organizations, and (3) Safeguarding Information Integrity in the Era of Fake News. IPLJ is dedicated to creating an open and vibrant forum for students to discuss such vital democratic principles, and we would hope that you will join us for the 25th annual Symposium.

Schedule of Events

8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Check-In and Coffee

9:00 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. Safeguarding Information Integrity in the Era of Fake News

  • Moderated by Professor Oliver Sylvain, Fordham University School of Law
  • Sally Hubbard – The Capitol Forum, Senior Editor; Women Killing It! Podcast, Creator and Host
  • Jeremy Chase – Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Senior Associate
  • Matthew Schafer – Buzzfeed, Newsroom Counsel

The promulgation of fake news raises important legal issues regarding non-press media entities, social media platforms, and online content providers. This panel will address the recent boom in fabricated online news, despite the fact that free speech and free press protections are limited to the truth. Suggested topics include: How do we regulate those who are not held accountable to the same legal standards as the press, or restrict the mediums in which fake news can be disseminated? What would be the consequences of such a requirement, and how would this be policed?

 

10:15 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Break

10:30 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. European Union Comparative Law

  • Moderated by Professor Martin Flaherty, Fordham University School of Law; Co-Director, Leitner Center for International Law and Justice
  • Nico Van Eijk – University of Amsterdam, Professor of Media and Telecommunications Law; The Institute for Information Law, Director
  • Carrie DeCell – The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, Staff Attorney

 

11:45 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Dean Matthew Diller’s Remarks

12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Lunch

1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Keynote Conversation

  • Moderated by Professor Cameron N. Russell, Fordham University School of Law; Executive Director, Fordham Center on Law and Information Policy
  • David Bralow – Press Freedom Defense Fund, Legal Director; First Look Media, First Amendment Counsel
  • James Risen – Two-Time Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist; First Look Media’s Press Freedom Defense Fund, Director
  • Daniel Jacobson – Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Associate; Former White House Associate Counsel

 

2:00 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. Break

2:15 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Political Non-Neutrality in the Press

  • Moderated by Professor Corey Brettschneider, Fordham University School of Law
  • Susan Buckley – Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, First Amendment Senior Counsel
  • Mark Conrad – Fordham University Gabelli School of Business, Associate Professor

This panel will discuss the deficiency of presenting multiple viewpoints in the press. As news organizations become more polarized, it appears the public grows more and more polarized as well. The Fairness Doctrine, introduced in 1949, required the presentation of news and public issues in a neutral way by requiring representation of multiple opinions or viewpoints of an issue. While this doctrine was limited to broadcast, this panel will explore how a similar requirement could apply across all press organizations. We will discuss if this would have affected the recent election; whether this would serve the public interest; whether the elimination of this doctrine has led to a higher level of polarized political views; and whether a similar policy would create an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of the press, or would foster productive discourse consistent with the goals of the freedom of expression doctrine.

 

3:30 p.m. Reception

Christina Sauerborn

Christina Sauerborn is a third-year J.D. Candidate at Fordham University School of Law and Online Editor of Volume XXVIII of the Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal.