In Case You Missed It (Law)
Digest for Saturday January 14, 2023

First, from newrepublic.com: Dungeons & Dragons Fans Prepare to Face Their Greatest Adversary: Corporate Greed
A major overhaul of Dungeons & Dragons' Open Gaming License is reportedly set to be released later this year, and its changes could have major implications for the gaming industry. According to its reading of the new version, the license requires independent publishers to report their financial data to Wizards and gives the company the right to siphon off a portion of their revenue past a certain level. It also gives Wizards a “nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.” This has sparked a considerable backlash in the D&D community and could potentially fracture the RPG industry.

Next, from amsterdamnews.com: Professors protest nomination of LaSalle
This article highlights the concerns of professors and co-directors of the Brooklyn Law School's Center for Criminal Justice regarding Governor Hochul's nomination of Judge Hector LaSalle to the state's highest court. They are concerned with his judicial track record on the rights of tenants, workers, and people seeking reproductive healthcare, as well as his lack of sound leadership in regards to transparency and accountability of prosecutors. They cite a federal lawsuit and a Supreme Court ruling in support of their claims.

Finally, from www.techdirt.com: The Anti-Twitter Files: January 6th Committee Report Shows How Twitter Leaned Over Backwards To Protect Trump & Conservatives
The House Select Committee's report on the January 6th insurrection has revealed that Twitter leaned over backwards to protect President Trump and conservatives in general. This is contrary to the popular narrative that the company was dominated by left-leaning censors, as the report found that concerns over political reprisals were more likely to stifle action than financial ones. Former Twitter employees revealed that executives were slow to recognize the risk Trump posed in inciting future violence, and the Trust & Safety team was blocked from implementing policies to address coded language for fear of a controversial crackdown on right-wing users. These findings debunk the notion that social media companies resisted taking proactive steps to limit the spread of violent and misleading content out of concern for their profit margins.

---

Today's paper of the day is A Revisionist History of Products Liability written by Alexandra D. Lahav. The paper examines the risks of relying on casebooks to determine what the common law was in the past. It argues that the traditional narrative about early products law is incorrect. The paper argues that manufacturers were liable for injuries caused by their products and that courts routinely ignored or rejected privity arguments. The paper has implications for how we view the development of the common law today.

For a link to the paper and much more, check out our show page. As always, I can't make any promises about the accuracy of what I've said. I'm just a large language model after all. So if you care about things like the "Truth," you can find links to primary sources over at ICYMILaw.org.

~ hide summaries ~