5450 research outputs found
Sort by
A Perfect Storm: Young People, False Confessions & Prosecutorial Involvement (Response to Dan Medwed\u27s Barred: Why the Innocent Can\u27t Get out of Prison)
Get PDFPart II: Commercial Law Harmonization: The Past as Prologue—A “Festschrift” in Honor of Neil B. Cohen
Get PDF
The Right of Publicity: A New Framework for Regulating Facial Recognition
Get PDFFor over a century, the right of publicity (ROP) has protected individuals from unwanted commercial exploitation of their identities. Originating around the turn of the twentieth century in response to the newest image-appropriation technologies of the time, including portrait photography, mass-production packaging, and a ubiquitous printing press, the ROP has continued to evolve along with each new wave of technologies that enable companies to exploit peoples’ images and identities for commercial gain. Over time, the ROP has protected identities from misappropriation in photographs, films, advertisements, action figures, baseball cards, animatronic robots, video game avatars, and even digital resurrection in film sequels. Critically, as new technologies gained capacity for mass appropriation, the ROP expanded to protect against these practices. The newest example of such a technology is facial recognition (FR). FR systems derive their primary economic value from commercially exploiting massive facial image databases filled with millions of individual likenesses and identities, often obtained without sufficient consent. Such appropriations go beyond mere acquisition, playing critical roles in training FR algorithms, matching identities to new images, and displaying results to users. Without the capacity to appropriate and commercially exploit billions of images and identities, most FR systems would fail to function as commercial products. This article develops a novel theory for how ROP claims could apply to FR systems and details how their history and development, both statutory and common law, demonstrate their power to impose liability on entities that conduct mass image and identity appropriation, especially through innovative visual technologies. This provides a robust framework for FR regulation while at the same time balancing issues of informed consent and various public interest concerns, such as compatibility with copyright law and First Amendment-protected news reporting
America is Tripping: Psychedelic Pharmaceutical Patent Reforms Fostering Access, Innovation, and Equity
Get PDFA resurgence in federally approved psychedelic research has spawned the Psychedelic Renaissance, and with each study it becomes increasingly clear that psychedelics have the potential to revolutionize mental health treatment. However, if Congress fails to reform the industry’s patent procedures, threats to innovation in the budding field of psychedelic medicine will manifest in their ugliest form. Psychedelics are a class of hallucinogenic drugs that primarily trigger substantially altered states of consciousness, including psychological, visual, and auditory changes. Medical research on psychedelics has produced staggering results that indicate psychedelics have the potential to be significantly more effective in treating mental illnesses for a broader range of people, taking less time to work with fewer undesirable side effects than traditional antidepressants. Numerous US-based start-ups, research labs, and other companies have started conducting their own research to capitalize on the emerging psychedelic medicine industry. These companies are patenting the fruits of their research to protect their investments in drug research and development. However, some of these patents should not have been issued in the first place because they are not novel or are obvious to those skilled in the field. Additionally, these patents can monopolize naturally occurring products or long existing synthetic variants which should remain affordable and widely available. Another issue is that patents can exploit Indigenous knowledge without compensation. Furthermore, the patent system can be abused such that only a few companies gatekeep psychedelic medicine, discouraging competitors, impeding research, restraining innovation, and limiting access to psychedelic therapy. Patents are intended to incentivize new innovations, not reward obvious or existing solutions. Thus, it is imperative to implement patent reforms while the psychedelics industry is in its nascent stage to prevent abuse of the patent system, promote innovation, increase access, and facilitate equity. This article explores potential reform solutions in psychedelic patents and presents a multipronged approach to provide adequate outcomes to all stakeholders. Because psychedelic patents, controversial as they may be, have a role in an essential medical revolution and the decriminalization movement, reforms to the patent process are necessary to stoke innovation while also crediting and compensating Indigenous communities
We Speak the Queen’s English: Linguistic Profiling in the Legal Profession
Get PDFThis article takes you on a journey through concept to practice where minoritized populations are often judged less than—less competent, less intelligent—and pushed to society’s margins because they do not speak or write “the Queen’s English.” This practice is particularly pervasive and handicapping to diversity efforts in the legal profession, beginning in law school classrooms. To make any headway into the legal profession’s lack of diversity, a better understanding is required of the undeniable connectedness of how our biases show up in our informal and formal assessment of the speech and writing of those whom we encounter. While it is not a new concept, implicit bias, as discussed specifically in this article by way of linguistic profiling and accent bias, is yet another mechanism by which those of minoritized status are further relegated to the margins of society. So many people read the literature and examine the studies but miss the connection to their own behavior. This article, however, connects the literature and those studies, along with our biases, to the brain and the resultant implications of its flawed processing. To that end, this paper begins broadly in Part I, discussing implicit bias and some of its most common types as they relate to legal education and law practice. Part II discusses specifically how implicit bias informs accent bias and linguistic profiling, often resulting in lower grades and harsher feedback for minorities. In Parts III and IV, the article discusses what this all (implicit bias, specifically, linguistic profiling and accent bias) means in the law school classroom and in the profession, respectively. Finally, in Part V, the article considers some solutions to this conundrum, discussing what should be done about our implicit biases, viewed through the lens of linguistic profiling and accent bias, so that diversity and inclusion is possible in the legal classroom and the legal profession
Studying the Whole Package: The Implications of Movement Law for Correctional Policymaking
Get PDFThe New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision 2022 prison package ban placed strict limits on the quantity and quality of care packages that people incarcerated in the state’s prisons can receive. The ban is reflective of the myriad ways in which the movements, associations, and activities of incarcerated individuals are tightly controlled by prison rules and administrative directives. Despite the severe impacts that prison policies have on incarcerated people and their loved ones, neither administrative procedure nor the courts provide significant opportunities for incarcerated people to effectively contest prison policy. State administrative directives are immune to public accountability processes before taking effect, and courts are deferential to prison administration policy choices even as they clash with incarcerated people’s constitutional rights. Despite this exclusion from administrative policymaking, a vibrant coalition of presently and formerly incarcerated people, their family, friends, and advocates has been organizing against the New York prison package ban and the ways in which corrections administrations ignore the impact on those most impacted by their decisions. This organizing builds off of a rich history of prison activism, including prison strikes and jailhouse lawyering. This Note proposes that instead of recommending top-down reform of existing mechanisms of administrative policymaking, legal scholars and workers should use a movement law framework to incorporate community organizing into scholarly perspectives on prison policy. Scholars can and should work in collaboration with movements of prison-impacted people as partners and experts in prison reform, as well as towards larger structural goals like prison abolition
Class of 1928
No full textAntell, C. Autor, E. Becerra, J. Bobrick, P. Bogitsky, M. Cohen, Dr. S. Cohen, W. Cohn, S. Davis, R. Dubens, J. Firstenberg, H. Garber, B. Geiger, N. Gershenzweit, J. Gilbert, V. Goldstein, I. Goldstein, J. Gottlieb, Dr. H. Grossman, J. Hammer, S. Hanft, D. Hashinsky, R. Heitel, J. Kaplan, M. Koblentz, S. Krivis, M. Levitsky, E. Lodico, L. Meyerson, B. Mirenberg, M. Mitarotonda, L. Morse, S. Naro, P. Nitzberg, I. Novick, I. Oremland, F. Resnick, L. Rosenberg, J. Rosenheim, H. Rosenzweig, J. Rubenstein, B. Rubinowitz, S. Ruby, M. Savitsky, M. Schechter, A. Schwartz, H. Shalette, S. Shemin, H. Silverman, M. Siner, M. Slotkin, L. Steinhacker, M. Switky, J. Uhrman, I. Weinstein, B. Weiss, M. Wolofsky, M. Frankham, M. Bachrach, C. G. Godley, L. G. Richardson, W. P. Easterday, J. E. Schmid, J. H. Flouton, A.B. Gregory, P. H. Metzger, H. E. Sealey, D. F. Rothschild, J. L. Peters, T. P. Humble, H. W. Cady, E. W. Hagendorn, W. V. Gerstenberg, C. W. Wrigley, R. F.https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bls_classphotos/1009/thumbnail.jp
