Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Comments On Preliminary Draft 9, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Jane C. Ginsburg, Peter S. Menell
Comments On Preliminary Draft 9, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Jane C. Ginsburg, Peter S. Menell
Faculty Scholarship
We are writing to offer our views on Preliminary Draft No. 9 (“PD9”) and express our deep and persistent concern about the direction and methodology that the Project continues to take, which we have sought to address and remedy at multiple points over the last several years. The elements of PD9 that we describe below are, in our view, particularly striking illustrations of the problems that we have previously identified. The gravity and salience of PD9’s problems are borne out in the comments of Judge Pierre Leval, who describes elements of the draft as requiring “a substantial editing and rewriting.” …
Additional Comments On Preliminary Draft 9, Jane C. Ginsburg
Additional Comments On Preliminary Draft 9, Jane C. Ginsburg
Faculty Scholarship
I am adding to the comments submitted by Profs. Balganesh, Menell and myself a list of points in PD9 that I believe require correction or clarification. These comments do not include Chapters 8, 10 or 11.
Comments On Council Draft 7 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg
Comments On Council Draft 7 [Black Letter And Comments], Jane C. Ginsburg
Faculty Scholarship
CD7 adopts several of the suggestions in my comments on PD8; I appreciate those modifications. CD7 does not, however, respond to a number of other criticisms and suggestions regarding PD8. For the benefit of the Council, I reprise the suggestions that I consider to be most significant to ensuring the accuracy of the draft (page and line references have been changed to reflect CD7)
Patently Risky: Framing, Innovation And Entrepreneurial Preferences, Elizabeth Hoffman, David L. Schwartz, Matthew L. Spitzer, Eric L. Talley
Patently Risky: Framing, Innovation And Entrepreneurial Preferences, Elizabeth Hoffman, David L. Schwartz, Matthew L. Spitzer, Eric L. Talley
Faculty Scholarship
An emerging common wisdom holds that courts have made it “too hard” to obtain patent protection in critical industries. The origin of this criticism dates back at least as far as the United States Supreme Court’s 2012 landmark opinion in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. which (the argument goes) triggered a chain reaction of judicial opinions rendering patent rights progressively more difficult to secure. Two years later, the Supreme Court decided Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, another opinion widely viewed as restricting patent rights. And, barely three years after Mayo, the Federal Circuit cited it in …
Liability For Providing Hyperlinks To Copyright-Infringing Content: International And Comparative Law Perspectives, Jane C. Ginsburg, Luke Ali Budiardjo
Liability For Providing Hyperlinks To Copyright-Infringing Content: International And Comparative Law Perspectives, Jane C. Ginsburg, Luke Ali Budiardjo
Faculty Scholarship
Hyperlinking, at once an essential means of navigating the Internet, but also a frequent means to enable infringement of copyright, challenges courts to articulate the legal norms that underpin domestic and international copyright law, in order to ensure effective enforcement of exclusive rights on the one hand, while preserving open communication on the Internet on the other. Several recent cases, primarily in the European Union, demonstrate the difficulties of enforcing the right of communication to the public (or, in U.S. copyright parlance, the right of public performance by transmission) against those who provide hyperlinks that effectively deliver infringing content to …
Extended Collective Licenses In International Treaty Perspective: Issues And Statutory Implementation, Jane C. Ginsburg
Extended Collective Licenses In International Treaty Perspective: Issues And Statutory Implementation, Jane C. Ginsburg
Faculty Scholarship
National legislation establishing extended collective licenses (ECLs) “authoriz[es] a collective organization to license all works within a category, such as literary works, for particular, limited uses, regardless of whether copyright owners belong to the organization or not. The collective then negotiates agreements with user groups, and the terms of those agreements are binding upon all copyright owners by operation of law.” Albeit authorized under national laws, collective coverage of non-members’ works may pose issues of compatibility with international norms. For example, if non-members must opt-out in order to preserve the individual management of their rights, is the opt-out a “formality” …