The Intellectual Property Program at Maryland Carey Law was proud to host Adam Adler, attorney for Rick Allen in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit case Allen v. Stein, as he honed his arguments before his most recent hearing on October 22.
This was the second opportunity for Maryland Carey Law students to delve into this fascinating case. The Intellectual Property Law Program hosted State Sovereign Immunity vs. Intellectual Property Rights in March of 2023 featuring Michael R. Klipper, an attorney specializing in intellectual property, copyright, and constitutional law, Rick Allen, executive producer and director of Nautilus Productions, and David L. McKenzie of Olive & Olive, P.A. , Allen’s attorney.
The discussion centered on one of the most fascinating intersections of constitutional and IP law in recent years: the ongoing legal saga surrounding the shipwreck of Blackbeard’s Queen Anne’s Revenge and the limits of state accountability under federal copyright law.
The Backstory: Blackbeard’s Ship and “Blackbeard’s Law”
For nearly twenty years, Nautilus Productions served as the official video crew for the Queen Anne’s Revenge Shipwreck Project, an archaeological excavation funded by the state of North Carolina. Nautilus’ footage, captured at no cost to taxpayers, has been featured on the BBC, History Channel, National Geographic, and other major outlets.
Trouble began when North Carolina published Nautilus’ copyrighted footage online without permission. Allen and Nautilus alleged that the state’s actions violated federal copyright law. In response, North Carolina enacted “Blackbeard’s Law” (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-25(b)), which declared all images of shipwrecks in state custody to be public records, effectively placing Allen’s footage in the public domain.
Allen’s lawsuit argues that the law amounts to an unconstitutional taking of property in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and even constitutes a Bill of Attainder—a legislative punishment directed at an individual, forbidden by the U.S. Constitution.
As Allen previously put it, “The Copyright Clause and the 5th and 14th Amendments are meant to protect citizens from unjust and illegal takings of their property without due process or compensation. This lawsuit will benefit all creators, who drive the American economy, and help protect them from intellectual property theft by states.”
A Decade-Long Legal Odyssey
The dispute has wound through every level of the judiciary. In Allen v. Cooper (2020), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress did not validly abrogate state sovereign immunity through the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act (CRCA), effectively barring Allen’s initial federal claims.
Yet the case didn’t end there. In 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina reopened the litigation, allowing Allen to amend his complaint under a new theory: that North Carolina’s actions violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, citing United States v. Georgia, 546 U.S. 151 (2006), as precedent for abrogating immunity when states violate constitutional rights.
North Carolina appealed that decision. On October 22, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit heard oral arguments in Allen v. Stein, marking the latest chapter in this long-running constitutional and copyright battle.
Law Students Get a Front-Row Seat
In preparation for the Fourth Circuit hearing, held on October 22, Adam Adler, Allen’s attorney, visited the law school to moot his oral argument with students. The session gave students a unique opportunity to engage directly with a live federal appellate case and an experience that combined practical training with doctrinal depth in constitutional and IP law.
Students got to discuss with Adler his argument structure, anticipate judicial questioning, and explore how the Supreme Court’s prior decision in Allen v. Cooper shapes the contours of the new Fourteenth Amendment claim.
Steven McKechnie ’26 commented, “Working through the case showed me that fields like IP and Constitutional law can involve engaging and fun topics that you never originally considered. After all, when most people think about IP and Constitutional law, they likely do not imagine something as unique as the IP laws surrounding Queen Anne’s Revenge."
McKechnie continued, “It was also rewarding to see mooting in a context outside of our usual academic setting. Unlike in-school moots, which are often done for grades or practice, this experience allowed me to see how the process applies in real-world litigation, where the arguments and decisions carry real consequences. That perspective was both eye-opening and motivating.”
At its heart, Allen v. Stein asks a fundamental question: Can a state use sovereign immunity to shield itself from accountability for violating private intellectual property rights? The case has profound implications for creators, universities, and public institutions alike.
Heather Terech, managing director of the IP Law Program remarked, “It’s a perfect example of how IP law never exists in a vacuum as it’s always in conversation with constitutional principles, history, and real human stories. We thank Mr. Adler for including our students in the moot.”