Loyola University Chicago, School of Law: LAW eCommons
Not a member yet
4877 research outputs found
Sort by
Cambodia\u27s Juvenile Justice System: Overcoming Challenges to Protect the Rights of Cambodian Youth
Get PDFPublic Health Preparedness & Response: An Exercise in Administrative Law
Get PDFResponses to epidemics, pandemics, and other biological disasters require multiple coordinated initiatives that combine sophisticated planning, sound emergency management, effective stockpiles, solid geographic information systems, well-developed laboratory surveillance and response, and effective management capabilities. Critical to the noted elements of planning and response is the existence of a legal structure, which underpins the operations of necessary programs. While the law may not be the first public health tool considered in a disaster, it is fundamental to the effective functioning of multiple actors and must be harmonized across jurisdictional lines. This article explores the role of law in pandemics and other biological catastrophes, highlighting broad developments in public health law that have been sparked by recent events. The piece will consider general responses and trends in health disaster management in the context of administrative law with a particular focus on agency responses. Background discussion will also offer a broad overview of the evolution of federal and state laws, highlighting core areas where parallel legal frameworks have developed. The second half of this essay will paint a more detailed portrait of administrative law responses to public health disasters focusing on the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), exploring medical countermeasures pursued by this agency to enhance preparedness and response. Key FDA legislation and recent guidance, as well as emergency use authorization (“EUA”) policies, will be analyzed, as a case study of how a pivotal agency has been shaped through law to deal with public health crises
Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling
Get PDFIn this Article, we offer both a legal and a pragmatic framework for defending against copyright trolls. Lawsuits alleging online copyright infringement by John Doe defendants have accounted for roughly half of all copyright cases filed in the United States over the past three years. In the typical case, the plaintiff\u27s claims of infringement rely on a poorly substantiated form pleading and are targeted indiscriminately at noninfringers as well as infringers. This practice is a subset of the broader problem of opportunistic litigation, but it persists due to certain unique features of copyright law and the technical complexity of Internet technology. The plaintiffs bringing these cases target hundreds or thousands of defendants nationwide and seek quick settlements priced just low enough that it is less expensive for the defendant to pay rather than to defend the claim, regardless of the claim\u27s merits.
We report new empirical data on the continued growth of this form of copyright trolling in the United States. We also undertake a detailed analysis of the legal and factual underpinnings of these cases. Despite their underlying weakness, plaintiffs have exploited information asymmetries, the high cost of federal court litigation, and the extravagant threat of statutory damages for copyright infringement to leverage settlements from the guilty and the innocent alike. We analyze the weaknesses of the typical plaintiff\u27s case and integrate that analysis into a strategy roadmap for both defense lawyers and pro se defendants. In short, as our title suggests, we provide a useful guide to the defense against the dark arts of copyright trolling
