|
 |
PUBLICATIONS
| Cite as: J. High Tech. L. |
| Robert Cunningham |
| In the eighteenth century, Montesquieu espoused the need to separate political power. In the twenty-first century, there is a pressing need to separate economic power. Drawing upon the frame of cultural environmentalism to counter the effects of the second enclosure movement of Intellectual Property Rights, this article advocates the employ of social production so as to diversify the production mix of the global information economy. This position is built upon public choice theory and the economic fundamentals of social production when contrasted with alternate modes of production. The corollary of the central thesis within the article is that social production within the information environment may afford, in some contexts, an important practical contribution to the contemporary liberal project of separating (economic) power. |
|
| Yvette Ostolaza and Ricardo Pellafone |
| Model Rule of Professional Conduct 4.2 to web content, in particular Facebook and MySpace. The article addresses the profession's increasing interest in leveraging these sites as a form of informal discovery, a trend that has recently been accompanied by a mounting concern about how such unchecked enthusiasm could violate ethical rules. With the privacy structures present in web content becoming more complex - particularly in the context of social networking profiles - prior reasoning that analogizes websites to books and newspapers is now obsolete. The article offers a competing analytical structure and demonstrates its efficacy by applying Rule 4.2 to the various types of social networking profiles. |
|
| Nisha Balsara |
| Fashion designers are victims of piracy when their intellectual creations are reconstructed and sold to mass-market consumers. U.S. copyright law has denied protection to these creations on the basis of functionality even though society views such fashion designs to be wearable art. More importantly, every recent introduction of copyright legislation pertaining to fashion designs has failed in Congress without reaching a vote. This note discusses the economic background of the fashion industry, the policy arguments for fashion as wearable art, the effect of modern-day fashion monopolies, and the nuances of international copyright law for fashion designs that the U.S. copyright law can adapt and Congress will accept in order to push fashion reform forward. |
|
| Alex Hess |
| In the modern age, where law enforcement is dependent on computers, the accuracy of government databases may determine whether a defendant gets a fair trial. Technology has played a major role in the area of Fourth Amendment search and seizure law through its use in law enforcement and the determination of probable cause. The most recent decision of Herring v. United States further restricts the application of the Exclusionary Rule where errors in government databases form the basis for a search. Under Herring, errors in government databases have the potential to infringe on an individual’s right against unreasonable search and seizures. The result is unfair: the accused is faced with illegally seized evidence and the government receives no penalty for keeping incorrect records. As policing becomes more reliant on computerized systems, the number of illegal arrests and searches based on errors in government record-keeping is poised to multiply. |
|
| Shannon McGuire |
| In 2009, the Executive and the National Institute of Health (NIH) attempted to extend federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, but recent court decisions upheld the Dickey Amendment’s prohibition against government funded research involving the intentional destruction of embryos. This note examines the controversy surrounding the rights of embryos, focusing on legislative and Supreme Court decisions. A critique of the Dickey Amendment is offered and suggests that Congress review the law with the intention to revise it. McGuire presents alternative legal guidelines that would permit the use of human embryos under specific circumstances, followed by a discussion about the advantages of an administrative program similar to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) used in Great Britain, and the benefit of having this type of framework. |
|
| Krista Stone |
| In its en banc hearing of Ariad v. Eli Lilly, the Federal Circuit held that written description is a distinct requirement under 35 U.S.C. §112, separate from enablement. Although Ariad has solidified and affirmed the written description precedent and provided some certainty for inventors, satisfying the written description under Ariad remains a fact based inquiry where the rules appear unclear and potentially fluid. Judging the adequacy of a written description by whether a disclosure is enabling would have been a superior standard because the in re Wands factors are well established. |
|
 |
|
