Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law

Fashion Forward: The Need For A Proactive Approach To The Counterfeit Epidemic, Casey Tripoli Jan 2016

Fashion Forward: The Need For A Proactive Approach To The Counterfeit Epidemic, Casey Tripoli

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

In the last two decades, the overall activity of the counterfeit market has expanded and risen 10,000 percent. This dramatic shift corresponds to growth of the Internet, which has unified the fascination of obtaining cheap, illegitimate goods with the efficiency of a mouse click. With the expected continued inflation of the counterfeit market comes a host of new concerns, namely, how to determine who is responsible for the distribution of these knockoffs, and who should be ordained to limit them in the marketplace. In both the United States and the European Union, however, outdated laws produce a mélange of inadequate …


Oracle America, Inc. V. Google, Inc.,750 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2014), Cert. Denied: Ideas, Methods, And Expression - Whose Innovation Is Protected?, Christopher J. Geissler Dec 2015

Oracle America, Inc. V. Google, Inc.,750 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2014), Cert. Denied: Ideas, Methods, And Expression - Whose Innovation Is Protected?, Christopher J. Geissler

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.


Flawed Transparency: Shared Data Collection And Disclosure Challenges For Google Glass And Similar Technologies, Jonathan I. Ezor Oct 2013

Flawed Transparency: Shared Data Collection And Disclosure Challenges For Google Glass And Similar Technologies, Jonathan I. Ezor

Jonathan I. Ezor

Current privacy law and best practices assume that the party collecting the data is able to describe and disclose its practices to those from and about whom the data are collected. With emerging technologies such as Google Glass, the information being collected by the wearer may be automatically shared to one or more third parties whose use may be substantially different from that of the wearer. Often, the wearer may not even know what information is being uploaded, and how it may be used. This paper will analyze the current state of U.S. law and compliance regarding personal information collection …


Rankings, Reductionism, And Responsibility, Frank Pasquale Aug 2013

Rankings, Reductionism, And Responsibility, Frank Pasquale

Frank A. Pasquale

After discussing how search engines operate, and sketching a normative basis for regulation of the rankings they generate, this piece proposes some minor, non-intrusive legal remedies for those who claim that they are harmed by search engine results. Such harms include unwanted (but high-ranking) results relating to them, or exclusion from high-ranking results they claim they are due to appear on. In the first case (deemed inclusion harm), I propose a right not to suppress the results, but merely to add an asterisk to the hyperlink directing web users to them, which would lead to the complainant's own comment on …


Privacy, Transparency & Google's Blurred Glass, Jonathan I. Ezor Feb 2013

Privacy, Transparency & Google's Blurred Glass, Jonathan I. Ezor

Jonathan I. Ezor

No matter the context or jurisdiction, one concept underlies every view of the best practices in data privacy: transparency. The mandate to disclose what personal information is collected, how it is used, and with whom and for what purpose it is shared, is essential to enable informed consent to the collection, along with the other user rights that constitute privacy best practices. Google, which claims to support and offer transparency, is increasingly opaque about its many products and services and the information they collect for it, posing a significant privacy concern.


Rankings, Reductionism, And Responsibility, Frank Pasquale Jan 2006

Rankings, Reductionism, And Responsibility, Frank Pasquale

Faculty Scholarship

After discussing how search engines operate, and sketching a normative basis for regulation of the rankings they generate, this piece proposes some minor, non-intrusive legal remedies for those who claim that they are harmed by search engine results. Such harms include unwanted (but high-ranking) results relating to them, or exclusion from high-ranking results they claim they are due to appear on. In the first case (deemed inclusion harm), I propose a right not to suppress the results, but merely to add an asterisk to the hyperlink directing web users to them, which would lead to the complainant's own comment on …