Law Commons^™

Teaching Doctrine For Justice Readiness, Amanda Levendowski

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Clinics strive to teach students lawyering skills. But clinics should also teach students how to use those skills to confront injustice and promote justice, an approach Jane Aiken refers to as “justice readiness.” Casework for clients presents many opportunities for students to become justice ready, but not all matters do so equally. Clinics come with built-in limitations. Some matters involve injustices in one area of law while leaving others untouched. And others don’t require creative advocacy for justice. Casework remains a powerful driver of justice readiness, but it cannot do the job alone.

Teaching students doctrine through a social justice …

Brief Of Michelle M. Wu As Amicus Curiae, Michelle M. Wu

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Copyright is, above all else, a balancing act. This equity principle is especially important when technology collides with traditional copyright. Market effects are certainly an important feature of that balance but must be weighed against other equitable interests, regardless of their technological form. Literary criticism, second-hand sales, and library lending all have the potential to impact sales but nevertheless are considered social goods that copyright is intended to foster.

Controlled digital lending ("CDL") was established to innovate these core, well-established components of copyright law, allowing libraries to secure their collections and maintain their relevance as physical stewards of knowledge in …

Copyright Protection For Works In The Language Of Life, Nina Srejovic

IPIPC Papers & Reports

In 2001, the DNA Copyright Institute sought to capitalize on the fear of human cloning by offering celebrities the opportunity to use copyright to secure exclusive rights in their DNA. At the time, a Copyright Office spokesperson pointed out that a person’s DNA “is not an original work of authorship.” That statement is no longer self-evident. A scientist claims to have used CRISPR technology to create a pair of twin girls with human-altered DNA that may provide immunity to HIV infection and improved cognitive function. Through gene therapy, doctors can “author” changes to patients’ DNA to cure disease. Scientists “edit” …

Resisting Face Surveillance With Copyright Law, Amanda Levendowski

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Face surveillance is animated by deep-rooted demographic and deployment biases that endanger marginalized communities and threaten the privacy of all. But current approaches have not prevented its adoption by law enforcement. Some companies have offered voluntary moratoria on selling the technology, leaving many others to fill in the gaps. Legislators have enacted regulatory oversight at the state and city levels, but a federal ban remains elusive. Both approaches require vast shifts in practical and political will, each with drawbacks. While we wait, face surveillance persists. This Article suggests a new possibility: face surveillance is fueled by unauthorized copies and reproductions …

Tailoring Ex Machina: Perspectives On Personalized Law, Gregory Klass

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In their book Personalized Law: Different Rules for Different People, Omri Ben-Shahar and Ariel Porat propose a radical approach to lawmaking: using of big data and artificial intelligence to tailor legal dictates to the individual histories and characteristics of persons they affect. This essay critically discusses that proposal.

It first examines normative differences among the Ben-Shahar and Porat’s proposals for personalizing laws. There are important differences, for example, between using big data and artificial intelligence to tailor how a private legal power can be exercised to the capacities and interests of the power-holder and imposing different speed limits on …

Monitoring Facebook, Hillary A. Sale

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Few companies still in business have a track record as negative as Facebook. Facebook has paid billions of dollars in government fines and paid hundreds of millions in private settlements. Yet, the financial penalties are actually minimal relative to the harm done. Facebook seems to have been involved one way or another in privacy breaches, organized crime, election manipulation, suicide, and even genocide. Mark Zuckerberg, who still controls Facebook, appears to ignore the consequences of his choices, seemingly prioritizing profits over people. He appears to disregard the law and operate without integrity or honesty, excommunicating insiders who speak out or …