bepress Legal Repository
Not a member yet
645042 research outputs found
Sort by
New York’s Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act: A Second Chance for Survivors or An Unattainable Freedom?
No full text
Should Your Buzz Support the Fuzz? A Discussion on Recreational Cannabis Generated Revenue and its Place in Municipality Budgets in an Era of Heightened Scrutiny of Local Law Enforcement
No full textLiquidated Damages in the New Civil Code of China: Underpinnings, Confusion, and Reforms
No full textThe new Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China (“the Code”), enacted by the National People’s Congress (“NPC”), is now the most authoritative statute in private law matters. The Code has three rules for liquidated damages. The first rule gives contracting parties the freedom to agree on this remedy and enjoy its convenience and clarity. It reduces the burden of proof, saves judicial resources, and respects freedom of contract. The second rule lets contracting parties request the courts to increase or reduce pre-set amounts that are disproportionate to the losses caused by breaches. This unique and flexible mechanism balances justice for both contracting sides, guarantees the validity of liquidated damages, advances respect for contractual freedom, makes this remedy more compensatory, and introduces benefits that other jurisdictions lack.
However, the third rule is defective, unjustifiably imposing different liabilities on those delaying contract performance compared to other breaches. This Article traces and analyzes the academic and historical roots of this problem, finding that the NPC has caused this defective rule to persist for over twenty years by mingling two contradictory academic assessment criteria and injecting confusion into black-letter laws. This Article proposes a solution through a slight amendment to this rule.
Furthermore, this Article identifies a gap in the Code regarding whether liquidated damages and contractual damages can concurrently apply. The NPC created this gap and let it exist for decades, causing nationwide contradictory judicial judgments, despite its significant impact on contracting parties. By examining the nature of two remedies, this Article proposes a reform to fill the gap.
This Article has academic value by further advancing the underpinnings of liquidated damages, tackling longstanding confusion, and filling current research gaps. It can also be a practical guide for utilizing this important remedy, both for China and its global trade partners. As the Code took effect recently, this analysis is also timely
Granting Legal Personality to Artificial Intelligences in Brazil’s Legal Context: A Possible Solution to the Copyright Limbo
No full textThis Article investigates the feasibility and consequences of granting legal personality to Artificial Intelligences (AIs) in the context of Brazilian law, with a special focus on copyright law. It conducts a thorough analysis of how such a grant can enhance legal security and encourage innovation in AI technologies. Through an integrative review of the literature and a comparative analysis of national and international legislation and jurisprudence, the study explores the implications of this legislative innovation. This Article highlights the importance of legal clarity for companies and investors in the AI sector, emphasizing that granting legal personality to AIs can simplify the identification of the copyright holder and protect investments. However, this Article also recognizes challenges, such as the complexity of assigning authorship and evaluating the originality of works created by AIs. A careful debate is proposed on criteria for determining which AIs should be considered legal persons and how to balance the rights and duties of AIs and their creators. This Article suggests adapting the legal structure of the limited liability company (LTDA) to incorporate AIs as operational entities, aiming for an effective legal framework for managing risks associated with AI. This Article concludes that granting legal personality to AIs in Brazil is a promising strategy, requiring careful consideration and forward-looking vision, emphasizing the need for Brazilian law to prepare for the opportunities and challenges of the AI era
Innovation Misunderstood
No full textInnovation 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 N.Y. 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 about 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
Gerald Forsythe, individually and on behalf of all v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd
No full textUSDC for the Eastern District of Pennsylvani
White Winston Select Asset Funds LLC v. Good Times Restaurants Inc
No full textUSDC for the District of Delawar