The Indiana Lawyer Podcast with Maura Johnson cover art

The Indiana Lawyer Podcast with Maura Johnson

The Indiana Lawyer Podcast with Maura Johnson

Written by: IBJ Media
Listen for free

About this listen

 Navigating the legal world can feel overwhelming, but it doesn’t have to be. The Indiana Lawyer Podcast is here to help you understand the laws impacting your life, work, and community. Whether you’re a legal professional, a business owner, or someone who wants to know how Indiana law shapes the world around you, this podcast is for you. Hosted by Maura Johnson—a passionate legal reporter—we’re here to bring you clarity and insights like no one else can. This podcast is brought to you by Taft, Today’s Modern Law Firm.All Rights Reserved Economics Politics & Government
Episodes
  • Taylor Swift's voice trademarks and what they mean for AI law

    Taylor Swift's voice trademarks and what they mean for AI law
    May 13 2026
    Taylor Swift recently filed three trademark applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including two sound marks for her speaking voice and one visual mark from her Eras Tour. The filings have drawn widespread attention for what they signal about celebrity IP protection in the age of artificial intelligence.Caitlin Byczko, an intellectual property attorney at Barnes & Thornburg's Indianapolis office, breaks down what Swift's applications are actually requesting, what legal hurdles they face, and why the outcome could set a roadmap for how celebrities, brands, and even everyday people protect themselves from AI-generated deep fakes and unauthorized voice cloning.Biscoe explains the difference between copyright, right of publicity and trademark protection, why sound marks remain rare and legally untested, and how the likelihood-of-confusion standard will determine whether Swift's registrations can hold up against AI platforms. She also addresses the international limitations of U.S. trademark law, the role of platform-level enforcement, and what Tennessee's 2024 right-of-publicity update signals about where state and federal regulation may be headed.For more legal news from Indiana, visit theindianalawyer.com, where you can subscribe to the daily newsletter and browse past podcast episodes.
    Show More Show Less
    28 mins
  • Improv skills that make lawyers better in court and life

    Improv skills that make lawyers better in court and life
    Apr 29 2026
    Listening, adaptability and quick thinking aren’t typically taught in law school, but two professionals argue they should be. They say improv training can sharpen courtroom performance, client negotiations and overall well-being. Mike Marbach, founder of Crossroads Comedy in Indianapolis, and Michael Murphy, a clinical law professor at Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, created a continuing legal education program built on improv exercises. The course links each exercise to legal practice, covering active listening, the “yes, and” approach to negotiation, emotional authenticity in court and projecting expertise on short notice.They also address a common hurdle for attorneys: dropping a rigid professional persona to fully engage in learning. Murphy, a former trial lawyer and in-house counsel, says improv-based CLEs outperform traditional lecture formats and help lawyers stay present and recover when proceedings go off track.
    Show More Show Less
    43 mins
  • Trump's AI legislative framework: What it means for business with Brian McGinnis of Barnes & Thornburg LLP

    Trump's AI legislative framework: What it means for business with Brian McGinnis of Barnes & Thornburg LLP
    Apr 15 2026
    The Trump administration's AI legislative framework sets the stage for a federal showdown over who controls artificial intelligence regulation in the United States. Brian McGinnis, a partner at Barnes & Thornburg and co-chair of the firm's data security and privacy law and artificial intelligence practices, breaks down the six pillars of the White House blueprint and what Congress would need to do to turn those priorities into law.McGinnis explains the core tension at the heart of the debate: Whether Washington should set a national standard that preempts state laws, or whether states like Colorado, California, and Texas should retain the authority to impose stricter requirements on AI developers. He draws a direct parallel to the long-running fight over federal privacy legislation, warning that without congressional action, companies face a growing patchwork of conflicting state rules.The conversation also covers the administration's directive to the Department of Justice to push back against state regulators, the relevance of the EU AI Act as a comparative model, and why Colorado's June enforcement deadline is creating immediate pressure for businesses trying to determine what compliance even looks like. McGinnis notes that companies are increasingly turning to frameworks like the NIST AI Risk Management Framework as stand-ins for legislation that does not yet exist.
    Show More Show Less
    29 mins
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_c
No reviews yet