Whatever happened to Afrocentric Scholarship?

It seems that the push for Afrocentric scholarship, curriculum, etc. has subsided. In the 90's and through the early 2000's there seemed to be far ranging interest across disciplines in Afrocentrism. Led primarily by Molefi Kete Asante (I know everyone probably has their favorite Afrocentrism author, but I'm most familair with Asante.), the movement emphasizes the importance of African people (collectively) and is often seen as a reaction to White and/or Western privledged notions of scientificity and scholarship. But, I have seen little work on Afrocentrism and the law. Brown describes her conception of Afrocentrism as a teaching tool:

Given the controversy surrounding Afrocentric education, it is important to clarify my precise position. I view Afrocentric education as an instrumental means to displace "gangsta" norms, rather than as an effort to utilize state funds to perpetuate a particular cultural heritage for its own sake. Thus I advocate for the Afrocentric academy, not as an end in itself, but as a means to an end - namely, the reformulation of cultural norms among urban black youth. In this light, Afrocentric education offers the black community a way to "turn inward" to address pervasive social and cultural problems....

Eleanor Brown, Black Like Me? "Gangsta" Culture, Clarence Thomas, and Afrocentric Academies, 75 N.Y.U. L. R. 308, at 322-3 (2000).

Of course, humyn life began in Africa, and philosophy, religion, and art all had their start on the African continent. This scholarship has had little impact on the law however. A quick Lexis or Westlaw search only yields a few results for "Afrocentrism" or "Afrocentric." Why? Why do we see this scholarship in other disciplines, but barely eking its way into legal scholarship?

Critical race theory, with it's reliance on historical and genealogical inquiry, would be a suitable cognate for Afrocentric legal theory. Clearly we see more international law students in the United States, some form Africa and others from across the continents. International law classes are also becoming more prevalent and there is quite a bit of theoretical work being completed in classes like Legal History, Jurisprudence, and the like. It seems however that the legal academy has failed to fully understand or adapt Afrocentrism to legal scholarship. The reasons for this evade me. Why is there little work being done on African philosophy and the the law and why is Afrocentrism not more commonly referenced in legal theory classes?

Hip-hop may be a place where Afrocentrism can take hold. With Nas and Damian Marley's Distant Relatives and an increasing number of artists from Africa, it seems like there may be an opportunity to engage in substantive hip-hop Afrocentric legal theory. Rappers like Akon, MC Solaar, and K'naan are popular hip-hop voices from Africa. Critical race theory must seek to include all Africans, not simply those in the United States. Hip-hop scholarship must do the same. I know, I know, that notion might offend some people, but an honest look at much of critical race theory work in the legal academy indicates that there is a bias toward focusing this critical lens on U.S. citizens and U.S. legal issues. Stopping critical race theory at the Middle Passage ignores a much more complex history of Africa and African people. Not much legal scholarship seems to be going beyond the beginnings of trans-Atlantic slavery however.

What space should exist for Afrocentrism and hip-hop research in the legal academy? Where or on what legal issue has there been considerable Afrocentrism work? Might there be drawbacks to Afrocentrism? Are there Afrocentric hip-hop artists (for the wiki entry about African hip-hop click here)? These are some of the questions that should be answered.

Let the discussion begin...

-- Nick J. Sciullo

War On . . . Symposium

The Journal of Gender, Race & Justice is now calling for papers for its 15th anniversary symposium.

The symposium, "War on: The Fallout of Declaring War on Social Issues," will explore the consequences of declaring war on society's problems.

From the War on Poverty, to the War on Crime, to the Ward on Drugs and Terror, by utilizing the "War On" rhetoric, policy and lawmakers unite the public against a common enemy and authorize themselves to act more aggressively against a group of people. The Journal of Gender, Race and Justice symposium will examine who gets swept into this class of enemies and how the practice of declaring wars on social issues affects marginalized communities.

Please see the call for papers for submission instructions. Paper proposals must be submitted by November 15th, 2010.

The Bar Exam

Artist: Lil' Wayne
Track: No Love
Album: Eminem's Recovery


Throw dirt on me and grow a wildflower
But it’s “fuck the world”, get a child out her
Yeah, my life a b-tch, but you know nothing bout her
Been to hell and back, I can show you vouchers
I’m rolling Sweets, I’m smoking sour
Married to the game but she broke her vows
That’s why my bars are full of broken bottles
And my night stands are full of open Bibles
I think about more than I forget
But I don’t go around fire expecting not to sweat
And these niggas know I lay them down, make their bed
Bitches try to kick me while I’m down: I’ll break your leg
Money outweighing problems on the triple beam
I’m sticking to the script, you niggas skipping scenes
Be good or be good at it
Fucking right I’ve got my gun, semi-Cartermatic

Nobody Beats the Biz

I recently took my sons (ages 2 and 5) to see “Yo Gabba Gabba Live” at Radio City Music Hall. For those who are not familiar with “Yo Gabba Gabba,” it is a music show on Nick Jr., the channel for the little brothers and sisters of Nickelodeon’s core audience. The program is hosted by an African-American character called DJ Lance, and it uses dance music (as in DJ-type dance music) to teach the life lessons of preschool (Don’t bite your friends, eat your veggies, etc.) to its viewers. The show is very popular among musicians and other entertainers, and personalities like Jack Black, Moby and the Roots are liable to appear on any given episode. Hip-hop artist Biz Markie is a regular on the program, and he is really the focus of this post.

Biz appeared in the live show as a special guest. He came out on stage and beatboxed several different beats. He then invited children to join him on stage to attempt to perform some of his beats. Now, Biz was never exactly a thug or a gangster in his hey day as a rapper, but it was still striking to see this big black man bouncing little white kids on his knee, teaching them how to beatbox. Along with Ice T’s playing a cop on TV, Ice Cube’s playing a Chevy Chase/Clark Griswold-type role in “Are We There Yet?,” and Snoop Dog’s acceptance by the fraternity/sorority set (see his cameo in “Old School”), Biz Markie’s Nick Jr gig is an example of the continuing mainstreaming of hip-hop. Recall that, almost 20 years ago, Biz and his ilk were branded thieves by Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy in Grand Upright Music Ltd. v. Warner Brothers Records, Inc. (the Gilbert O’Sullivan “Alone Again (Naturally)” case). The judge even referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York for consideration of criminal prosecution. Biz’s “crime” in that case was sampling, but the involvement of many other rappers in what was considered antisocial or criminal behavior made the music and the culture “other” for many Americans for many years.

Now that hip-hop is mainstream, and its most righteous gangsters play suburban dads in the movies, is there room for the law to revisit its antagonism toward hip-hop culture? Now that Biz Markie can teach preschoolers about the culture on Viacom’s dime, can copyright law rework Judge Duffy’s notion of “stealing” to find a place for the sampling, remixing, and other borrowing that have been fundamental to hip-hop since the beginning? Now that Nick Jr. has caught the Vapors, it’s time for the Copyright Act to do so as well.

New Blog Projects on Teaching Law

I know that many of us who read this blog are also concerned about teaching, particularly teaching law. My colleague, Jena Martin Amerson and I have started two new blogs: (1) Teaching Law in the 21st Century and (2) Thoughts about Citizens United.

Thoughts on Citizens United is designed to provide an opportunity for students who read and analyze issues ranging from corporations, election law, constitutional law and other related disciplines to comment and construct their own knowledge of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Professors in relevant areas are welcome to direct themselves and their students to the Thoughts on Citizens United page. Teaching Law in the 21st Century is designed to be a forum for professors from law and higher education generally to discuss how to reach the Internet generation. I hope that the audience of this blog would find this of interest given the fact that the so-called "post-hip hop" generation is also the Internet generation (a generation which, as I alluded to in an earlier post, uses the Internet for self and political expression). Together, these blogs represent an opportunity to think about and apply practices designed to reach the Millenials.

We hope you will join the discussions at Teaching Law in the 21st Century and Thoughts on Citizens United.

Crack-Powder Cocaine Disparity Update

Hip hop has long critiqued the racial disparities in the criminal justice system. In particular, artists have spoken out in strident rhyme against the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity. Ice Cube in "The N***a Ya Love to Hate" and Lil Wayne in "Don'tGetIt/Misunderstood," both critique in detail the devastating impact of the sentencing disparity on communities of color and young African American men (see below). Both Ice Cube and Lil Wayne, amongst dozens of other artists, may take heart in a recent Obama era legislative enactment.

In a completely under the radar moment, a new law of considerable importance was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama in August. The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 was introduced by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) in March 2010 and signed into law by President Obama on August 3, 2010. Before passage of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, defendants that possessed 5 grams of “crack” cocaine were sentenced to a mandatory minimum prison term of 5 years. In contrast, a defendant possessing powder cocaine had to possess 500 grams of powder before the same 5-year mandatory minimum sentence would be triggered. For more than 20 years, a 100:1 crack-powder sentencing disparity has existed in our nation’s federal legislation. This disparity has literally devastated urban communities across the nation and has cost the U.S. government millions of dollars as federal and state prisons are overflowing with non-violent inmates, an overwhelming majority of which are African American.

As an example, 80% of all defendants sentenced under federal crack cocaine laws in 2008 were African-American, and prison sentences for crack cocaine offenses averaged two years longer than those for powder cocaine. As President Obama observed at the signing of the Fair Sentencing Act, the old sentencing regime was “fundamentally unfair.” The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 aims to “restore fairness to Federal cocaine sentencing,” by significantly reducing the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity from 100:1 to 18:1. Today, a defendant must now possess 28 grams of crack cocaine (rather than 5 grams) before a 5-year mandatory minimum sentence is required. This difference represents an enormous practical effect, which is that this new threshold essentially eliminates the mandatory 5-year minimum for simple possession—most dealers and traffickers carry crack in amounts of 28 grams or more.

Further, the Fair Sentencing Act increases monetary penalties for major traffickers and increases prison sentences for a number of aggravating factors, including violence or weapons possession during cocaine trafficking offenses, which practically shifts the focus of the federal “War on Drugs” from simple possession to violent trafficking. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reports that this shift will result in federal prison savings of over 42 million over the next five years.

Why does any disparity continue to exist in the cocaine sentencing regime? While a complete elimination of the crack/powder disparity was what Senator Durbin initially proposed, proponents of an equal sentencing regime were unable to fully eliminate the disparity, no doubt based on the reputation of “crack” as a dangerous drug that inspires greater violence and allegedly delivers great health risks. Still, 18:1 is a watershed moment as it portends an elimination of the disparity in those punished by federal cocaine laws.

Lil Wayne talks about the sentencing disparity in Don'tGetIt here (begins at 2:35).

Ice Cube references the impact of drug sentencing on African American males in The N***a Ya Love to Hate here (begins at :40)


* Portions of this blog post are cross-posted on the SALT Law Blog.

Vote for HipHopLaw.com for the ABA Blawg 100

You have until October 1 to cast your vote. Voting requires a no more than 500 character explanation of your vote and some basic contact information. Every vote counts. If you enjoy HipHopLaw.com or think others in the legal community should read it, vote.

Editors make the final decision, so don't think your efforts are futile. One well-written entry is all we might need.

The voting page: http://www.abajournal.com/blawgs/blawg100_submit/.

It would be really cool to see HipHopLaw make the cut.


-- Nick J. Sciullo

CFP: Multi-Contributor Anthology of hip-hop essays

CFP: Multi-Contributor Anthology of hip-hop essays

Hip hop has always been, and continues to be, so many things to so many people. With roots in the past and yet at the same time a revolutionary style of music and expression it offers a rich mix of topics, viewpoints, meanings and inspirations. Hip hop has finally begun to be embraced by scholars and is still eminently important to the public that consumes it and this project hopes to appeal to both ends of that spectrum. This anthology aims to look at the 30-40 year (depending on who you are and when you consider hip-hop 'born') catalogue of hip-hop music, the artists that created and continue to create it, the issues that have influenced it and continue to be prevalent in the music, the past from which it was drawn, the future that it will continue to inhabit. The aim is to show hip hop's past, present and future, where it has come from, where it is now and where it will be ten, twenty or thirty years from now. The past section thus far will include an essay on the connections between beboppers and hip hoppers, a connection between Robin Hood ballads and hip-hop, and an essay addressing the ways in which hip hop artists make use of history and memory (musically, lyrically and visually) to create their version of history. The future section thus far includes an essay on the Australian incarnation of hip hop and addresses hip hop's future in the globalization of the art form, and an essay addressing the political/activism aspect of the hip hop generation and what is required to make it work. The present section is at this point empty, and all sections are in need of many more submitals. The following list is just a few possibilities for topics and if your interest area overlaps with someone else's paper that will not rule out its inclusion as I envision an anthology that can be used to show multiple angles/opinions in one place.

Past:
Hip hop's connection to any previous musical style/tradition.
Hip hop's respect for its own past.
The founding days of hip hop.
Changes in hip hop 'uniforms' in terms of fashion connected to the message/music.

Present;
The state of hip hop today, is it dead as Nas suggests, in a period of transition/reinvention, is it strong as ever?
What is hip hop saying about current social status?
How has hip-hop impacted/been impacted by events like Hurricane Katrina/Gulf Oil Spill?
Is President Obama our first hip hop president?
Would Wyclef be the answer Haiti needs?

Future:
Should hip hop be introduced to the classrooms? How? In what ways shouldn't it?
What is the future of hip hop as a genre?
In what ways will globalization change what we think of as hip hop?
In what ways can hip hop be used as a political vehicle? To what ends?

The publishing company that I am working on this project with would like a book proposal in a month or two, at this point I am collecting abstracts that include an approximate page length to be able to give the publisher an accurate idea of how long the entire project it will be. That being said, I will also be submitting sample chapters so if anyone has a paper written already or can have a paper written in a month or two I would love to have as many sample chapters as possible. As mentioned previously, I want this collection to have broad appeal, if you are interested in doing more opinion piece than research paper feel free to do so, if you have the desire to do interviews instead of any kind of article that would be fantastic. The background is of no difference as I want this project to be as diverse as possible, sociology, music history, African-American studies, popular culture studies, fashion, psychology, history, any and all are welcome. Please submit any abstracts, address any questions to, and feel free to contact me at kingmjl@gmail.com.

The Bar Exam

Artist: Damian Marley

Track: Patience - Nas and Damian Marley

Album: Distant Relatives

Some of the smartest dummies

Can’t read the language of Egyptian mummies

An’ a fly go a moon

And can’t find food for the starving tummies

Pay no mind to the youths

Cause it’s not like the future depends on it

But save the animals in the zoo

Cause the chimpanzee dem a make big money

This is how the media pillages

On TV the picture is

Savages in villages

And the scientist still can’t explain the pyramids, huh

Evangelists making a livin' on the videos of ribs of the little kids

Stereotyping the image of the images

And this is what the image is

You buy a khaki pants

And all of a sudden you a say a Indiana Jones

An’ a thief all da gold and thief all da scrolls and even the buried bones

Some of the worst paparazzis I’ve ever seen and I ever known

Put the worst on display so the world can see

And that’s all they will ever show

So the ones in the West

Will never move East

And feel like they could be at home

Dem get tricked by da beast

But a where dem a go flee when the monster is fully grown?

Solomonic linage whe dem still can’t defeat and them coulda never clone

My spiritual DNA that print in my soul and I will forever own, Lord

Two takes—one Hip Hop, the other . . . not—on the Ground Zero Mosque Controversy

As you probably know, the dispute over Cordova House, the proposed Muslim community center in lower Manhattan has dominated the political headlines for the past month. The dispute has grown from what at least one reporter called a non-issue to a political and ideological fight which has been weighed in on by the likes of former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and President Obama (with a subsequent clarification by President Obama’s staff, as reported here by the Washington Post).

I originally planned on reporting on the blog and the interviews (here, here and here) by hip-hop impresario Russell Simmons in defense of the cultural center. (In addition to being the founder of Def Jam Records, Simmons is a board member of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding.) More recently in the Wall Street Journal Online, Simmons challenged Palin and Gingrich to prove they support freedom of worship for Muslims by asking them “to join me in fighting anti-Muslim hate-speech across the nation.”

But something else—something thoroughly hip hop, 21st century, and about freedom of speech—caught my attention here: dueling videos on YouTube that go to the heart of the debate. This was originally reported as “YouTube music videos go head-to-head over ‘ground zero mosque’” on the site Political Scrapbook. As soon as I read the story and saw there was a hip-hop connection, I had to investigate and bring it to your attention. To borrow a famous cinematic line: “here . . . we . . . GO!”

In this corner, we have a not-ready-for-prime-time Eminem-esque performance by a young rapper who goes by the YouTube handle “big j stokes” laying down his blunt opinions (read: Parental Guidance Suggested) about the dispute in his homemade cut, The Ground-Zero Mosque RAP!!!

In the other corner, in a style that I’ll call “country music karaoke,” is the counter-argument by “Trade Martin” who performs the oh-so-cryptically titled We’ve Got to Stop the Mosque at Ground Zero.

Now that you’ve seen the two sides, let me be a law professor for a paragraph. I always try to tell my students to always try to understand not just the text, but the context. So, a word on the context: the “Rap” appears homemade by a guy who looks no older than about 17. I mean really—he calls himself “big j stokes.” If you need further proof of the desktop-soapbox nature of his comments, look at his channel on YouTube. You’ll be dazed and confused by the hand-cam videos of Big J in karaoke rap battle.

In contrast, the “We’ve got to Stop the Mosque” video was produced by “Project Shining City.” From a quick glimpse of their website, Project Shining City is a conservative website which touts American constitutionalism and is aspiring to speak to “the Glen Beck middle.” Moreover, the co-producer, WooTv. us, is a similar Tea Party website, lead by African American Tea Party activist Lloyd Marcus. The site proclaims itself to be the “Home of the Conservative Voice.”

All this sums up the debate and divisions better than my editorializing ever could. So, (most of) my sarcasm aside, here is proof positive that, contrary to the beliefs of some, the First Amendment is not being undercut by special interests, whether they be left, right, or center. In this case, the First Amendment is doing exactly what it is supposed to do: allowing a debate to take place in the open marketplace of ideas that is YouTube. This debate is happening in a fashion that is driven by music and poetry’s appeal to our emotional and intellectual sensibilities—which is the power of hip hop (and also, apparently, cheesy country karaoke).

It is also uniquely 21st century since anyone with a computer and a mix program can state their point of view backed up by a catchy beat. Here, we have a kid with a desktop camera, a hip-hop consciousness, and a beat who is holding his own with the better-funded right wing conservative interests. This fact shows that the First Amendment is working at its best when it creates this opening for a (small-d) democratic throw down. Best of all, the First Amendment allows almost any point of view to be articulated and then you, gentle reader, get to decide what you believe.

(Afterword: I realize that this whole debate depends on the fact that YouTube is free and that anyone can post to it at any time. Thus, I also realize that much could be said about a real threat to the First Amendment: the possible end of net neutrality. It seems fair to ask whether corporate interests will destroy the marketplace of ideas by putting a price tag on the Internet. That is a serious issue, but it is a debate for a future blog posting.)

Consumer Financial Protection Agency and Hip-Hop

From the strange, but cool file...

Professor of Law Elizabeth Warren, who is quite the authority in financial law and its cognates and who chaired the Congressional Oversight Panel overseeing the bank bailout, wrote a 2007 article in Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, entitled Unsafe at Any Rate, which called for the creation of something very similar to the CFPA. Prof. Warren is now the subject of a hip-hop song.

It's not the worst song I've heard, but the video could use a little work.




-- Nick J. Sciullo

President Wyclef Jean?

In a story that appears too good to be true, rumours are swirling that hip hop superstar Wyclef Jean is considering a run for the presidency of his home nation of Haiti. With the 2010 presidential election upcoming, many are watching Wyclef closely to see whether he will enter the political arena formally. For the past three years, Wyclef has represented Haiti as an "ambassador-at-large," a post to which he was appointed by current president René Préval.

As reported previously on HipHopLaw.com, Wyclef has been intensely involved in the reconstruction efforts ongoing in Haiti following the devastating earthquake that crippled the island nation.

In a statement to the press, Jean's family indicated that "Wyclef's commitment to his homeland and its youth is boundless, and he will remain its greatest supporter regardless of whether he is part of the government moving forward. . . . If and when a decision is made, the media will be alerted immediately." The deadline for declaring as a presidential candidate in Haiti is August 7, 2010.

Could President Wyclef Jean become a reality?

"It Ain't My Fault": Calling Out the Blame Politics of the BP Oil Spill

Much has been made of the following question from the BP Oil Spill: whom exactly do we blame? In the months since the Deepwater Horizon sank and the well began spewing oil, BP and its corporate partners went to great lengths in front of Congress to point fingers at each other for responsibility for the disaster. It was quite clear that this was meant to stake out positions for the lawsuits to come seeking to assess liability for the disaster.

In reaction to this Blame Posturing, the “Gulf Coast All-Stars” (including Mos Def, Lenny Kravitz, Trombone Shorty, the Preservation Hall Jazz Band, and actor Tim Robbins) performed an old New Orleans standard with new hip-hop lyrics that call out the hypocrisy of these blame politics: It Ain’t My Fault.

This song was written as part of the Gulf Aid benefit concert held this past May to benefit the thousands now facing the end of their livelihoods. Mos Def describes the motivation for the song this way:

[I]t’s an old New Orleans classic we use it to speak about the current situation that’s going on in the Gulf and . . . [to] speak up about the situation that prevails in the world today.

Even after the Gulf Aid concert, the Blame Posturing continues. It is a story we now know all too well: BP’s chief executive, Tony Hayward, in a series of gaffs, went from contrite to cagey about BP’s responsibility for the disaster. As the New York Times reported on June 23:

He initially minimized the impact of the disaster, then publicly wished he could “get my life back.” Most recently, he took a day off to watch a yacht race in Britain even as Louisiana shrimpers were kept off the water by a fishing ban because of the oil spill.

In a move that came as a surprise to no one, BP quickly completed its plan to remove Hayward from dealing with the crisis. (BP = Bumped Prez!) Hayward’s conduct ratcheted up the desire to make BP pay for the spill, and it is clear that its establishment of a settlement fund is BP’s effort to get ahead of the liability curve. Moreover, as has been discussed on the Corporate Justice Blog, the legal issues surrounding the liability for the spill (coupled with the ongoing financial crisis) potentially will transform the approach to corporate liability generally. (Indeed, BP took the remarkable step of withholding dividends from its shareholders in anticipation of having to pay for this disaster; a smart move, as Professor Dorothy A. Brown argued.)

Moreover, the blame game has become Blame Politics. It began with President Obama expressing his frustration at BP’s finger pointing. In the same breath, President Obama ordered the revamping of the regulatory scheme for oil drilling to attack the “cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill.”

Yet, as the response of the government unfolded from May to June, which included the role the President undertook to change regulation, reconsider drilling policy, and facilitate the creation of the BP Settlement Fund, pundits and polls blamed President Obama for not being angry enough. (Was the message to President Obama “Be Perturbed”?) At the same time, other pundits cautioned Obama to remain measured because he risked being perceived as “the angry black man.” (The contradiction here is worth further exploration in a later post.) Moreover, some Republicans defended BP and criticized Obama (while others objected to this “defense”) for running a “shakedown” of BP through helping to negotiate the $20 million settlement fund. (BP = Bad Politicians?)

The Blame Pastime of the last two months misses the larger point—the Gulf Coast has been Battered Plenty. It Ain’t My Fault is a pointed reminder of this fact. Mos Def reminds us that the BP oil spill, possibly the biggest oil spill ever (as well as the failed levies of Hurricane Katrina) is somebody’s fault, and the mechanisms for corporate and governmental accountability once again appear to be insufficient to solving the problem. While blame is passed around, it is the Besieged People of the Gulf Coast region that are suffering—through Katrina and now through the Deepwater Horizon disaster—while litigation and political posturing continue.

It is no surprise that the American people are near the Boiling Point.

Camille Nelson Chosen as Dean at Suffolk

One of our very own has made it to perhaps the pinnacle of the professoriate as the newly selected Dean of the Suffolk University Law School. The full announcement from Suffolk is here: http://www.suffolk.edu/42396.html.

This is a tremendous accomplishment and a great honor. Nelson is the first womyn and first person of color to hold this position in Suffolk's 104 year history.

You can view Professor Nelson's Hofstra faculty page here: http://law.hofstra.edu/directory/faculty/fulltimefaculty/ftfac_nelson.html.

Perhaps there's a correlation between presenting at The Evolution of Street Knowledge conference that gave birth to this blog and career advancement. It may be too early to tell.

Three cheers for Dean Nelson! This is truly a great accomplishment and I'm sure I speak for all HipHopLaw.com bloggers when I say, "Best of luck and congratulations."


-- Nick J. Sciullo

Dr. Dre Dealt Blow in WIDEawake Death Row Lawsuit

Dr. Dre's lawsuit against the bankrupt Death Row Records successor label WIDEawake Death Row Records has been dealt a blow. Following WIDEawake's re-release of The Chronic and Dre's greatest hits last year, Dre sued claiming that his trademark and publicity rights had been violated. Dr. Dre also claimed that he has not been paid royalties since he broke from the label and Suge Knight more than a decade ago. Last week, California District Court Judge Christina Snyder dismissed Dre's trademark infringement and publicity rights infringement claims ruling that the re-release did not violate Dre's rights under current trademark infringement law. Judge Snyder did allow the back royalties claim to go forward.

According to Billboard.com, In rejecting the trademark and publicity rights infringement claims, Judge Snyder reasoned:

"In analyzing the case, California District Court Judge Christina Snyder applied the so-called 'Monty Python' rule, after a 1976 case where a defendant extensively edited the TV comedy series in order to broadcast it on television. The question was whether the changes to Dr. Dre's album were more than 'cosmetic.'

Snyder ruled the alterations were 'minor and inconsequential.' She also pointed out that the image used on the cover jacket is the same photograph from the original album, instead of a more current photo, which may have gone further to imply some new endorsement."

While Dr. Dre's back royalties claim will go forward, he has lost his trademark infringement claim based primarily on the way he left Death Row in 1996, leaving most of his rights in the catelogue to Suge Knight and Death Row.