Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Copyright law (3)
- Patent law (3)
- Copyright infringement (2)
- Intent (2)
- Internet (2)
-
- Law reform (2)
- Liability (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- Antitrust (1)
- Biologic drugs (1)
- Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (1)
- Burden of proof (1)
- Competition (1)
- Congress (1)
- Damages (1)
- Digital media (1)
- Drugs (1)
- Exclusivity (1)
- Fair use (1)
- Federal Trade Commission (1)
- Federal agencies (1)
- First sale doctrine (1)
- Food and Drug Administration (1)
- Generic drugs (1)
- Global-Tech Appliances Inc. v. SEB S.A. (1)
- Incentives (1)
- Industries (1)
- Internet service providers (1)
- Licenses (1)
- Motion picture industry (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Antitrust Rulemaking As A Solution To Abuse On The Standard-Setting Process, Adam Speegle
Antitrust Rulemaking As A Solution To Abuse On The Standard-Setting Process, Adam Speegle
Michigan Law Review
While many recognize the critical role that technology plays in modern life, few appreciate the role that standards play in contributing to its success. Devices as prevalent as the modern laptop computer for example, may be governed by over 500 interoperability standards, regulating everything from the USB drive to the memory chip. To facilitate adoption of such standards, firms are increasingly turning to standard-setting organizations. These organizations consist of members of an industry who agree to abide by the organization's bylaws, which typically regard topics such as patent disclosure and reasonable licensing. Problems arise, however, when members violate these bylaws …
Copyright And The Vagueness Doctrine, Bradley E. Abruzzi
Copyright And The Vagueness Doctrine, Bradley E. Abruzzi
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The Constitution's void-for-vagueness doctrine is itself vaguely stated. The doctrine does little to describe at what point vague laws-other than those that are entirely standardless-become unconstitutionally vague. Rather than explore this territory, the Supreme Court has identified three collateral factors that affect its inclination to invalidate a law for vagueness: (1) whether the law burdens the exercise of constitutional rights, (2) whether the law is punitive in nature, and (3) whether the law overlays a defendant-protective scienter requirement. Measured against these factors, copyright law does not meet the vagueness doctrine's minimum requirement of fair notice to the public. Copyright, by …
Patent Infringement As Criminal Conduct, Jacob S. Sherkow
Patent Infringement As Criminal Conduct, Jacob S. Sherkow
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Criminal and civil law differ greatly in their use of the element of intent. The purposes of intent in each legal system are tailored to effectuate very different goals. The Supreme Court's recent decision in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 131 S. Ct. 2060 (2011), however, imported a criminal concept of intent--willful blindness--into the statute for patent infringement, a civil offense. This importation of a criminal law concept of intent into the patent statute is novel and calls for examination. This Article compares the purposes behind intent in criminal law with the purposes behind intent in patent law to …
Fighting The First Sale Doctrine: Strategies For A Struggling Film Industry, Sage Vanden Heuvel
Fighting The First Sale Doctrine: Strategies For A Struggling Film Industry, Sage Vanden Heuvel
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The first sale doctrine, codified at 17 U.S.C. § 109, grants the owners of a copy of a copyrighted work the right to sell, rent, or lease that copy without permission from the copyright owner. This doctrine, first endorsed by the Supreme Court in Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus, was established at a time when the owner of a good necessarily had to forego possession in order to sell or lease the item to another.[...] The changes in technology and industry over the past two decades threaten to upend this balance. In today's digital world, an owner of a copy of …
Patents V. Statutory Exclusivities In Biological Pharmaceuticals - Do We Really Need Both, Yaniv Heled
Patents V. Statutory Exclusivities In Biological Pharmaceuticals - Do We Really Need Both, Yaniv Heled
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Over the past decade or so, the United States has been the arena of a boisterous debate regarding the creation of a new regulatory framework for the approval of generic versions of biologics-based pharmaceutical products (also known as "biological products" and "biologics")--an important and increasingly growing class of drugs. The basic purpose of such a framework is to create a fast and less-costly route to FDA approval for biologics that would be similar or identical to already-approved biological products--typically ones that are sold on the market at monopoly rates--thereby allowing cheaper versions of such medicines to enter the market. One …
Argh, Matey! The Faux-Pas Of The Sopa (Stop Online Piracy Act), Anna S. Han
Argh, Matey! The Faux-Pas Of The Sopa (Stop Online Piracy Act), Anna S. Han
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
Earlier, I posted about a network neutrality case, Verizon v. FCC, which could have far-reaching consequences for the Internet industry. Another concerted attempt to regulate the Internet, disguised in the form of a piracy protection bill, recently came before the House Judiciary Committee and garnered widespread disapproval. Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) and a bipartisan group of twelve co-sponsors introduced the “Stop Online Piracy Act” (“SOPA”) on October 26, 2011, which punishes websites that are accused of facilitating copyright infringement. Although touted by its supporters as a weapon against foreign sites that steal and sell American inventions, SOPA is problematic because …