Law Commons^™

Breaking The Vicious Circularity: Sony's Contribution To The Fair Use Doctrine, Frank Pasquale

Faculty Scholarship

The fair use doctrine permits certain uses of copyrighted material that are unauthorized by the copyright holder. In 1984, the Supreme Court decided in Sony v. Universal Studios (Sony) that unauthorized home taping of television programs was a fair use of such programs. Decried by the dissent and frequently contested in ensuing cases, that decision sealed the majority's case that the videotape recorder was capable of substantial non-infringing uses and therefore legal.

In the twenty years since Sony, the dissent's skepticism about the fairness of time-shifting has gotten about as warm a reception in appellate courts as the majority's position. …

Thou Shalt Not Kill As Defeasible Heuristic: Law And Economics And The Debate Over Assisted Suicide, Daniel J. Gilman

Faculty Scholarship

Although the literature addressing medical decisions at the end of life is vast, surprisingly little of it has come from the perspective of law and economics. This article begins with a critical account of one of the very few law and economics-based discussions of physician-assisted suicide (PAS), that developed by Judge Richard Posner in his book, Aging and Old Age. Central to Judge Posner's account is a model of PAS as a sort of technological innovation. What this particular innovation is supposed to bring is a radical reduction in certain critical information costs attending end-of-life decision making. It is …

Calabresi's The Costs Of Accidents: A Generation Of Impact On Law And Scholarship, Donald G. Gifford

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Defining Dicta, Maxwell L. Stearns, Michael Abramowicz

Faculty Scholarship

In recent decades, legal scholars have devoted substantially greater attention to studying the origin and nature of stare decisis than to defining the distinction between holding and dicta. This appears counterintuitive when one considers, first, that stare decisis applies only to holdings of announced precedents, and second, that beyond problematic and rudimentary intuitions, the legal system has failed to develop meaningful definitions of these terms. While lawyers, legal scholars, and jurists likely assume that they can identify dicta when they see it, a careful analysis that categorizes the range of judicial assertions in need of proper characterization reveals that defining …