Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Human Rights And Regulatory Lessons From "Lilly V. Canada", Daniel J. Gervais
Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Human Rights And Regulatory Lessons From "Lilly V. Canada", Daniel J. Gervais
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The triangular interface between trade, intellectual property (IP) and human rights has yet to be fully formed, both doctrinally and normatively. Adding investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) to the mix increases the complexity of the equations to solve. Two resultant issues are explored in this Article. First, the Article considers ways in which broader public policy objectives—in particular the protection of human rights—can and should be factored into determinations of whether a state’s action is compatible with its trade obligations and commitments in the state-to-state dispute settlement context. Second, the Article examines whether doctrinal tools used in state-to-state, trade-dispute settlement to …
Music As A Matter Of Law, Joseph P. Fishman
Music As A Matter Of Law, Joseph P. Fishman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
What is a musical work? Philosophers debate it, but for judges the answer has long been simple: music means melody. Though few recognize it today, that answer goes all the way back to the birth of music copyright litigation in the nineteenth century. Courts adopted the era’s dominant aesthetic view identifying melody as the site of originality and, consequently, the litmus test for similarity. Surprisingly, music’s single-element test has persisted as an anomaly within the modern copyright system, where typically multiple features of eligible subject matter are eligible for protection. Yet things are now changing. Recent judicial decisions are beginning …
Patenting Around Failure, Sean B. Seymore
Patenting Around Failure, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Many patents cover inventions that do not work as described. Fingers often point to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Patent Office), which is criticized for doing a poor job of examining patents. But the story is more complicated for at least three reasons. First, from an information standpoint, the Patent Office is at a clear disadvantage because the inventor has little incentive to disclose failure because it might compromise patentability. Second, an inventor is not required to actually make everything that is claimed (or verify that everything that is claimed actually works) before filing a patent application. Third, inventors …