Digital Collections @ Suffolk
Not a member yet
8574 research outputs found
Sort by
Note - Not Everything That Glitters Is Gold, Misclassification of Employees: The Blurred Line between Independent Contractors and Employees under the Major Classification Tests
Get PDFA Patriotic Playground: Reexamining the Constitutionality of the Daily Recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in Public Schools
Get PDFA Digital Albatross\u27: Navigating the Legal Framework of Domestic Police Drone Technology versus Privacy Rights in Massachusetts and beyond
Get PDFBankruptcy- Is It over Even Though No One Is Singing: Determining Finality in Bankruptcy Appeals- Bullard v. Hyde Park Sav. Bank (in Re Bullard), 752 F.3D 483 (1st Cir. 2014)
Get PDFTop Tens in 2014: Patent, Trademark, Copyright and Trade Secret Cases
Get PDFThe Supreme Court decided more patent cases in 2014 than any previous year. It lowered the standard for awarding fees in patent cases, clarified that the patent holder carries the burden of showing infringement even in declaratory judgment actions, lowered the standard for invalidating patent claims as vague, and rejected the theory that infringement may occur by simply adding the actions of separate parties. The most important case, Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int\u27l, announced a test for patentable subject matter, especially for software and business method inventions, that was considerably more restrictive than case law to date. Meanwhile, the most notable case in copyright seemed to go in the opposite direction, raising the level of copyright protection for software, perhaps even creating a split in the circuits. In Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the application programming interfaces of the Java programming language were copyrightable expression, as opposed to non-copyrightable functional matter. The Supreme Court held that rebroadcast of television programs infringed the public performance right, even where done using technology that effectively gave each viewer a personal antenna. The Court also rejected the application of laches in copyright cases, permitting litigation of long-standing infringement. Other cases provided important precedent on evergreen issues in intellectual property law. Cambridge Univ. Press v. Patton reversed a safe harbor approach to the application of fair use to university coursebooks. Garcia v. Google, Inc. raised the possibility that anyone who contributes to a work, such as an actor in a film, may have their own separate copyright. Trademark cases addressed such questions as who may bring a false advertising case, when matter is functional, when trademarks become generic or are otherwise abandoned, when others may use a mark to describe things, and when a mark may be cancelled as disparaging of a group of people. In trade secret, the Third Circuit avoided the surprisingly important issue of liability for account slurping. Other cases dealt with the interfaces between trade secret and contract and between trade secret and patent. Courts also dealt with the balance between disclosing information to potential partners and maintaining sufficient security measures to qualify for trade secret protection
Thinking historically about Boston City Directories
Get PDFThis open educational resource was developed for a Suffolk University undergraduate history research methods course, “Gateway to the Past: The Historian’s Practice.” This guide to Boston City Directories describes the types of information contained in this source and ways it might be used by researchers.https://dc.suffolk.edu/archive-oer/1006/thumbnail.jp
Wrinkles in the Administrative Fabric: Regulatory Initiatives and California Economic Development
Get PDFThis article first examines legal issues surrounding California’s decision to enact by regulation and provide a feed-in tariff for certain renewable power less than a decade after the economic collapse of California’s new system of electric sector regulation in 2001. Second, the article also examines legal issues surrounding the ethanol/liquid fuels program implemented as part of California climate change regulation. These two seminal administrative law cases construe the flexibility and limits of state regulation of in-state electricity transactions and out-of-state liquid fuels destined to be sold in the state. Both of these significant California administrative law programs were challenged legally, as violations of both state administrative law and violations of the federal Constitution. This article examines these and other state administrative law legal issues and challenges
