11929 research outputs found
Sort by
Innovation Misunderstood
Get PDFInnovation is transformative and key to future prosperity. It is therefore of no surprise that antitrust laws seek to promote it. What is surprising, however, is that despite the central role that innovation occupies in competition cases, its actual treatment by the courts is far from nuanced. In this paper, we reflect on the D.C. Circuit’s 2023 ruling in New York v. Meta to illustrate the prevailing monocular vision adopted by the court in its treatment of innovation. That vision, we argue, reflects simplistic assumptions as to innovation dynamics and mistaken beliefs about the digital economy. It is further compounded by jurisprudential problems that characterize U.S. antitrust laws. The result is troublesome. While “everyone talks about innovation,” the courts do little to inquire on its scope, nature, and value. Nor do courts recognize the impact of anticompetitive strategies deployed by the dominant platforms on disruptive innovations and their heterogeneity
The Downstream Consequences of Transunion LLC v. Ramirez: Why 5 U.S.C. § 2954 Plaintiffs Have Article III Standing Consistent with Lower Courts’ Interpretation of Transunion
Get PDFThe Supreme Court, in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, created additional standing hurdles by requiring plaintiffs to identify a common law historic-analogue when alleging a statutory harm. In doing so, the Court arguably limited informational standing—a unique Article III standing theory whereby plaintiffs may establish an injury for failure to receive information—because informational injuries did not exist at common law.
This Comment asks whether informational standing survives in a post-TransUnion universe, using 5 U.S.C. § 2954 and lower courts’ interpretation of TransUnion for guidance. The statute, § 2954, comes to light in a string of litigation involving the potential illegality of former president Trump’s lease of the Old Post Office Building in Washington, DC.
This Comment argues that § 2954 plaintiffs can sufficiently establish “downstream consequences” from their failure to receive information and therefore suffer an informational injury consistent with Article III. Additionally, this Comment recommends that lower courts differentiate between TransUnion’s “historic-analogue test” and “downstream consequences” test when deciding whether plaintiffs have an informational injury to ensure the survival of informational standing
“Clothing” the De Minimis Loophole: The Story of an Exception Swallowing Rule
No full textGulbahar Haitiwaji, an engineer and member of the Chinese Uyghur minority group, received a call from her employer asking her to visit a police station in Kunlun to complete paperwork for her retirement pension. Upon her arrival, she quickly discovered the employer’s purported request was a trap. Chinese authorities showed Haitiwaji a photograph of her daughter participating in a Uyghur demonstration in France and accused Haitiwaji’s daughter of being a “terrorist.” Haitiwaji was detained, a bag was placed over her head, and her ankles were chained. For five months, Chinese police officers repeatedly interrogated her, subjecting her to a variety of punishments. In one instance, she was chained to her bed for twenty days
Captured Without Consent: Reckoning With Non-Volitional Disclosures Around the Home in Long-Term Pole Camera Cases
No full textThis Comment argues that courts reasoning whether long-term pole camera surveillance of a home is a Fourth Amendment search should not apply the public observation doctrine because entering and exiting one’s home is not volitional. It compares long-term pole camera cases to Carpenter v. United States, where the court did not apply the third-party doctrine upon determining that cell phone usage was not volitional. The author argues that if the public observation doctrine was applied to long-term pole camera cases, residents would have to achieve secrecy to secure privacy protection around their homes
Adopting the Benefit-of-the-Doubt Rule in Veterans’ Affairs Adjudication That Congress Intended
No full textThis Comment examines the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of 38 U.S.C § 5107(b), more commonly known as the “benefit-of-the-doubt” rule as it applies to the adjudication of claims by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The benefit-of-the-doubt rule is a unique standard of proof in American jurisprudence in that, by its own text, purports to instruct the Department of Veterans Affairs to give claimants the benefit of the doubt in situations where the available evidence does clearly support a case for benefits. This Comment proceeds by reviewing the history of veteran benefits adjudication in the United States and the regulatory history of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule. It continues by analyzing the statutory history of § 5107(b) and case law interpreting it using recognized canons of statutory construction. Ultimately, this Comment concludes that the Federal Circuit has likely misinterpreted § 5107(b), narrowing its application, despite textual and Congressional evidence that it should apply more broadly than tie-breaking scenarios
New Complaint Filed in N.D.Tex. Challenges Mifepristone Regulation
No full textThe States of Missouri, Kansas, and Idaho have sued the FDA challenging the regulatory framework for Mifepristone. The suit is filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division
What Kind of Court Is This? : Perceptions of International Justice Among Rohingya Refugees
Get PDFIn the context of mass atrocities, the legitimacy of institutions for international justice—such as the International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice—is based on the assumption that they vindicate demands for accountability by the survivors of horrific human rights violations. Yet, notwithstanding advances in victim representation at these Hague-based courts, victim-centered justice remains elusive. This article contributes to centering the voices of survivors in their specific cultural contexts, against the backdrop of existing efforts that too often render invisible their perspectives. Through semi-structured interviews, conducted in late 2022, with 444 Rohingya survivors of genocide who have fled Myanmar to refugee camps in neighboring Bangladesh, we attempt to convey the priorities of these survivors situated within their cultural understanding of justice. We contextualize the empirical data gathered from the survey within Rohingyas’ lived experiences of persecution in Myanmar, their cultural framings of communal justice, and their current reality of prolonged displacement in refugee camps in Bangladesh. The article concludes by describing the implications of this survey’s findings on future engagement of the Rohingya in international justice processes, and a wider reflection on how grassroots perspectives can and should shape the global justice discourse
Copyright and Research in Latin America: Law, Courts, and Perceptions
Get PDFResearch on the intersection of copyright law, research activities, and innovation in Latin America reveals significant deficiencies in the legal framework and public discourse surrounding copyright limitations and exceptions (L&Es) for research purposes. The problem is more visible with modern data assembling and analyzing techniques, such as through artificial intelligence (AI) systems. This study highlights the scarcity of explicit provisions for research-related exceptions in the region by examining copyright legislation, case law, and stakeholder perspectives in six Latin American countries. Despite indications that judicial interpretation is expanding the scope of L&Es, particularly in Brazil, awareness of legal nuances remains low among researchers and broader stakeholder communities, hindering meaningful public discourse on the need for copyright reform. Our findings underscore the imperative to enhance awareness, foster community engagement, and promote public dialogue to advocate for legal reforms that balance copyright protection and research freedoms. Moreover, the lack of robust L&Es for research in the Global South exacerbates disparities with the Global North and impedes progress in fields reliant on copyrighted materials, such as AI research
Expert Opinions
No full textA low interest credit card generally has a lower annual percentage rate (APR) than the national average for credit card interest; some credit cards even offer a lower “teaser” introductory rate to attract customers. Having said that, credit card rates are often tied to the prime rate, which is the lowest interest rate banks charge their best borrowers. The prime rate is based on the federal funds rate, which is influenced by the Federal Reserve\u27s benchmark rate
The Original Instagram: Whose Property Is It?
Get PDFWhen a worker creates a personal social media account and then uses it to promote their employer, courts differ as to whether subsequent use by the employer can operate as an implied transfer of the account when the employment relationship ends. Allowing an implied transfer flies in the face of traditional contract and property law principles and results in workers unknowingly giving up their right to a valuable asset they created. The better rule in determining ownership of a social media account is to first determine who owned the account at the time of original creation and then determine whether a transfer occurred via a valid, express contract. This rule was recently adopted for the first time in -LM Couture, Inc. v. Gutman.
This article examines why the “Original Creation and Transfer” test is a better approach than implied transfer when determining ownership of a social media account. The Original Creation and Transfer test promotes judicial economy, clarity, and predictability. It also has the advantages of a property rule, namely encouraging investment, reducing litigation, and allowing employee mobility. This test achieves the proper balance between worker and employer rights and yields fair results in test cases. Additionally, a uniform law should be created based on the Original Creation and Transfer test to help promote uniformity across jurisdictions