Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (26)
- Criminal Procedure (23)
- Intellectual Property Law (20)
- Courts (12)
- Litigation (11)
-
- Computer Law (10)
- Constitutional Law (10)
- Internet Law (8)
- Science and Technology Law (8)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (6)
- Legal Profession (6)
- International Law (5)
- Law and Gender (5)
- Civil Procedure (4)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (4)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (4)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (3)
- Judges (3)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (3)
- Legal History (3)
- State and Local Government Law (3)
- Arts and Humanities (2)
- Business Organizations Law (2)
- Civil Law (2)
- Family Law (2)
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Law and Economics (2)
- Institution
-
- Santa Clara Law (16)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (13)
- American University Washington College of Law (7)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (6)
- Brooklyn Law School (4)
-
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (4)
- Mercer University School of Law (4)
- University of Michigan Law School (4)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- UIC School of Law (3)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (3)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (3)
- University of Miami Law School (3)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (3)
- University of Richmond (3)
- Brigham Young University Law School (2)
- Campbell University School of Law (2)
- Duke Law (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (2)
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (2)
- University of Missouri School of Law (2)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- William & Mary Law School (2)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Cal Poly Humboldt (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (20)
- Rosetta Stone (16)
- Google (15)
- Discovery (14)
- Criminal Law (4)
-
- Expert testimony (4)
- Consumer confusion (3)
- DNA (3)
- Dilution (3)
- Law (3)
- Law & Psychology (3)
- Testimony (3)
- Trademark infringement (3)
- Appeals (2)
- Bias (2)
- Confrontation (2)
- Confrontation Clause (2)
- Crawford (2)
- Deception (2)
- Dying declarations (2)
- Exclusionary rule (2)
- Expert witnesses (2)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (2)
- Forensic Science (2)
- Forensic science (2)
- Forensics (2)
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- Jurors (2)
- Jury (2)
- Liability (2)
- Publication
-
- Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix) (16)
- Cardozo Law Review (11)
- Faculty Publications (9)
- Faculty Scholarship (9)
- All Faculty Scholarship (6)
-
- Articles (5)
- Mercer Law Review (4)
- American University Law Review (3)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
- BYU Law Review (2)
- Campbell Law Review (2)
- Faculty Working Papers (2)
- Faculty Works (2)
- Maryland Law Review (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Nevada Supreme Court Summaries (2)
- Popular Media (2)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (2)
- UIC Law Review (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- All Faculty Publications (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Buffalo Journal of Gender, Law & Social Policy (1)
- Buffalo Law Review (1)
- Canadian Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal (1)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (1)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- Distinguished Student Research Papers (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 126
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 3 - Declaration Of Kris Brewer (Counsel For Google), Kris Brewer
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 3 - Declaration Of Kris Brewer (Counsel For Google), Kris Brewer
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 2 - Declaration Of Margret M. Caruso (Counsel For Google), Margret Caruso
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 2 - Declaration Of Margret M. Caruso (Counsel For Google), Margret Caruso
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 1 - Declaration Of Jonathan B. Oblak (Counsel For Google), Jonathan Oblak
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 1 - Declaration Of Jonathan B. Oblak (Counsel For Google), Jonathan Oblak
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Google's Opposition To Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Google
Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Google's Opposition To Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Google
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Response To Google's Objections To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Jennifer Spaziano
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Response To Google's Objections To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Jennifer Spaziano
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Jennifer Spaziano
Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Jennifer Spaziano
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Ix, Tab 44 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Ix, Tab 44 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, Rosetta Stone
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Ix, Tab 45 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Ix, Tab 45 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, Rosetta Stone
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong
Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong
Faculty Publications
The article begins with a discussion of the historical development and jurisprudential bases for jurisdictional discovery, then analyzes the two major structural problems with the device, namely (1) the lack of any identifiable standard regarding when jurisdictional discovery will be ordered and (2) the absence of any understanding about the proper scope of such discovery. Next, the article describes the root causes of these structural inadequacies and proposes several ways to address the root concerns, relying on a new line of Supreme Court precedent (including Ashcroft v. Iqbal) as well as analogies to other common law jurisdictions. The paper concludes …
Why Modern Evidence Law Lacks Credibility, Daniel D. Blinka
Why Modern Evidence Law Lacks Credibility, Daniel D. Blinka
Buffalo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appealing To The Legislature: A Comparative Analysis Of The Georgia Statutes Regarding Evidence Preservation And Access To Post-Conviction Dna Testing, Joy D. Aceves-Amaya
Appealing To The Legislature: A Comparative Analysis Of The Georgia Statutes Regarding Evidence Preservation And Access To Post-Conviction Dna Testing, Joy D. Aceves-Amaya
University of the District of Columbia Law Review
DNA evidence testing is the leading cause of exonerations in criminal cases throughout the United States.2 Yet, without the preservation of evidence in these cases and the ability to subject this evidence to advancing technology in DNA testing, many claims of innocence go unheard and defendants remain incarcerated while the real perpetrators of crime go unpunished. As of September 2009, seven Georgia men have been exonerated by post-conviction DNA testing.3 Such exonerations should be considered "victories for our criminal justice system: they free the innocent, correct miscarriages of justice that undermine public confidence in our criminal justice system, and allow …
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures, Rosetta Stone
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 5 - Deposition Of Rose Hagan (Former Google Managing Counsel - Trademarks, Jewelry Maker), Rose Hagan
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
No Witness? No Admission: The Tale Of Testimonial Statements And Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts, Jody L. Sellers
No Witness? No Admission: The Tale Of Testimonial Statements And Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts, Jody L. Sellers
Mercer Law Review
In Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, the United States Supreme Court held that the Massachusetts trial court's admission into evidence of forensic "certificates of analysis" violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. Following Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court held that the accused has a right to be confronted with the forensic analysts at trial unless "the analysts [are] unavailable to testify at trial" and the accused "had a prior opportunity to cross-examine" the analysts. Melendez-Diaz will have an important impact on criminal evidence procedure, specifically in regard to the potential growth of notice-and-demand statutes.
Arrival Then Denial: Interpreting §203(A) Of The Clean Air Act, Analyzing Evidentiary Challenges, & Assessing Conflicting Statutory Directives, Jesse Levine
Distinguished Student Research Papers
An “arrival then denial” occurs when uncertified engines arrive at a U.S. port, but are denied entry to the U.S. by Customs & Border Protection (Customs). Why does this matter? In most cases these uncertified engines are sent back to the country of origin. However, due to resource constraints, a sizeable number of uncertified engines slip past Customs and enter the U.S. each year. Uncertified engines, without proper controls, have been estimated to emit at least 30% more emissions than their certified counterparts. Such emissions exacerbate climate change, acid rain, and air quality generally. EPA attorneys assert that their best …
Herring V. United States: The Continued Erosion Of The Exclusionary Rule, Robert W. Smith
Herring V. United States: The Continued Erosion Of The Exclusionary Rule, Robert W. Smith
Mercer Law Review
At its inception, the exclusionary rule was relatively straightforward: The use at trial of evidence obtained from a search or seizure that violated a defendant's Fourth Amendment rights was itself a violation of the defendant's constitutional rights. But throughout the exclusionary rule's history, its source, scope, purpose, and applicability have all seen changes, ultimately limiting the situations in which evidence obtained through a Fourth Amendment violation would be suppressed. The key to the limitation of the exclusionary rule was the United States Supreme Court's eventual conclusion that the use at trial of illegally seized evidence does not always violate the …
Description And The Evidentiary Production Of Images, Kyle J. Mcgee
Description And The Evidentiary Production Of Images, Kyle J. Mcgee
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Juror Testimony Of Racial Bias In Jury Deliberations: United States V. Benally And The Obstacle Of Federal Rule Of Evidence 606(B) , Brandon C. Pond
Juror Testimony Of Racial Bias In Jury Deliberations: United States V. Benally And The Obstacle Of Federal Rule Of Evidence 606(B) , Brandon C. Pond
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
No Longer The Right To Remain Silent: Cross-Examining Forensic Analyst Testimony, Casey Unwin
No Longer The Right To Remain Silent: Cross-Examining Forensic Analyst Testimony, Casey Unwin
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Documentation, Documentary, And The Law: What Should Be Made Of Victim Impact Videos?, Regina Austin
Documentation, Documentary, And The Law: What Should Be Made Of Victim Impact Videos?, Regina Austin
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Law And Humor In Johnnie To's Justice, My Foot!, Marco Wan
Law And Humor In Johnnie To's Justice, My Foot!, Marco Wan
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidence Verité And The Law Of Film, Jessica Silbey
Evidence Verité And The Law Of Film, Jessica Silbey
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Crossing Over: Why Attorneys (And Judges) Should Not Be Able To Cross-Examine Witnesses Regarding Their Immigration Statuses For Impeachment Purposes, Colin Miller
NULR Online
You are sitting in an empty bar (in a town you’ve never before visited), drinking a Bacardi with a soft-spoken acquaintance you barely know. After an hour, a third individual walks into the tavern and sits by himself, and you ask your acquaintance who the new man is. “Be careful of that guy,” you are told. “He is a man with a past.” A few minutes later, a fourth person enters the bar; he also sits alone. You ask your acquaintance who this new individual is. “Be careful of that guy, too,” he says. “He is a man with no …
Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 1 - Transcript Of Motions Hearing, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia
Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 1 - Transcript Of Motions Hearing, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia
Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)
Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?
Individualization Claims In Forensic Science: Still Unwarranted, Jonathan Koehler, Michael J. Saks
Individualization Claims In Forensic Science: Still Unwarranted, Jonathan Koehler, Michael J. Saks
Faculty Working Papers
In a 2008 paper published in the Vanderbilt Law Review entitled "The Individualization Fallacy in Forensic Science Evidence," we argued that no scientific basis exists for the proposition that forensic scientists can "individualize" an unknown marking (such as a fingerprint, tire track, or handwriting sample) to a particular person or object to the exclusion of all others in the world. In this special issue of the Brooklyn Law Review, we clarify, refine, and extend some of the ideas presented in Fallacy. Some of the refinements are prompted by Professor David Kaye's paper, also in this issue of the Review, in …
Retribution And The Experience Of Punishment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, J. Bronsteen, J. Masur
Retribution And The Experience Of Punishment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, J. Bronsteen, J. Masur
All Faculty Scholarship
In a prior article, we argued that punishment theorists need to take into account the counterintuitive findings from hedonic psychology about how offenders typically experience punishment. Punishment generally involves the imposition of negative experience. The reason that greater fines and prison sentences constitute more severe punishments than lesser ones is, in large part, that they are assumed to impose greater negative experience. Hedonic adaptation reduces that difference in negative experience, thereby undermining efforts to achieve proportionality in punishment. Anyone who values punishing more serious crimes more severely than less serious crimes by an appropriate amount - as virtually everyone does …
Valuing Intellectual Property: An Experiment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, C. Sprigman
Valuing Intellectual Property: An Experiment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, C. Sprigman
All Faculty Scholarship
In this article we report on the results of an experiment we performed to determine whether transactions in intellectual property (IP) are subject to the valuation anomalies commonly referred to as “endowment effects”. Traditional conceptions of the value of IP rely on assumptions about human rationality derived from classical economics. The law assumes that when people make decisions about buying, selling, and licensing IP they do so with fixed, context-independent preferences. Over the past several decades, this rational actor model of classical economics has come under attack by behavioral data showing that people do not always make strictly rational decisions. …
Welfare As Happiness (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco
Welfare As Happiness (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco
All Faculty Scholarship
Perhaps the most important goal of law and policy is improving people’s lives. But what constitutes improvement? What is quality of life, and how can it be measured? In previous articles, we have used insights from the new field of hedonic psychology to analyze central questions in civil and criminal justice, and we now apply those insights to a broader inquiry: how can the law make life better? The leading accounts of human welfare in law, economics, and philosophy are preference-satisfaction - getting what one wants - and objective list approaches - possessing an enumerated set of capabilities. This Article …