13203 research outputs found
Sort by
The Ends and The Means: Indigenous Sovereignty, Climate-Related Legal Actions, and Frameworks of Justice
Get PDFPhilosophy professor Timothy Morton uses climate change as his foremost example of what he calls a hyperobject: an object that occupies both more physical space and more time than humans can usefully comprehend. For example, one can understand local meteorological occurrences in isolation without necessarily understanding that a given storm was more severe than it should have been because an overall increase in global temperatures makes for a more aggressive, active hydrological cycle. Environmental organizations focused on raising awareness understand this. Public campaigns to wed the nebulous idea of climate change to specific, concrete images are incredibly memorable: think of a polar bear struggling to stand on a diminished iceberg. In light of climate change\u27s unique status as a problem, it may seem more reasonable that climate change has yet to meet its ideal legal match regarding causes of action; climate change is too large and too slow-moving to be tackled by traditional schools of thought within the law. Indeed, the number of countries that have recognized a justiciable cause of action for climate change are far outweighed by countries that have not.
Climate change activist groups often pursue multiple legal approaches and appeal to multiple levels of authority worldwide, as there are many imperfect options available. Indigenous nations, depending on the country in which they are contained, may have treaty-based or otherwise more specific causes of action available for climate-related legal actions. An examination of currently ongoing climate litigation that features Indigenous parties in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Argentina provide insight into how Indigenousspecific domestic legal approaches may shape climate-related adjudication going forward
Introduction au droit public (3rd edition)
No full textPublic law can be defined as the law of public affairs (res publica) according to a method that is both historical and comparative: historical because history is an obligatory point of passage for any effort to theorize legal questions; Comparative because in the globalized world that is ours, and at a time when the French Republic is resolutely committed to the construction of Europe, it is no longer possible to train jurists who have no other benchmarks and other horizons than those of their national legal systems.
The book traces the successive ages of public law: first, the monarchical age that goes from the Renaissance to the American and French revolutions of the late eighteenth century and which sees the birth of the founding concepts of public law; secondly, the republican age in which there is no longer a sovereign, but free and equal men in law to whom it is now up to define and manage public affairs together, and therefore to organize power in modern society.
For each period and in each major legal system (codified rights and common law rights), the birth and evolution of the great fundamental notions of public law are studied: sovereignty, the State, the law, the separation of powers, the protection of individual rights against power, the great conceptions of the general interest, and administrative justice.
Text of book in French.https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facbooks/1296/thumbnail.jp
Where is the Author: the Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Works
Get PDFThe two groups of the human-or-machine questions, whether AI-generated works are copyrightable and whether AI-generated works have human authors, are revisiting the current copyright law with the emergence of AI-generated works. These revisiting questions reveal that the current authorship requirement fails to provide a clear and operable standard on evaluating a human contributor’s intellectual labor for creative output. Such a defect of the current authorship requirement has to be fixed to respond to the technological change of artificial intelligence and the burgeoning prevalence of AI- or advanced computer program-generated works.
This dissertation’s main goal is to fix the flaw of the authorship requirement by establishing an improved authorship spectrum. The improved authorship spectrum can serve as a guide to evaluate whether a human contributor provide sufficient intellectual labor for creative output, and to locate the human author(s) behind a creative output in this AI era. I argue that by applying the improved spectrum to AI-generated works, such types of works can be distinguished into the two categories “the authored and copyrightable AI-generated works” and “the authorless and uncopyrighted ones.” Therefore, my intended conclusion for the revisiting human-or-machine questions is: not every AI-generated work falls out of the scope of copyright protection; some of the AI-generated works do have human authors and thus are copyrighted works of authorship, but some are authorless works because their human contributors all failed to offer the sufficient intellectual labor for the work
Fraud on Any Market
Get PDFClaims of securities fraud had historically failed because investors seldom rely on false or misleading statements when transacting securities. To bolster confidence in securities markets, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a doctrine called “fraud-on-the-market” so that duped investors can show detrimental reliance without ever encountering the fraudulent statements. The doctrine assumes that a stock’s price reflects all material information, meaning that an investor who bought tainted stock has constructively relied on the fraud.
Fraud-on-the-market is not only unavailable in other markets but is also embattled within securities law. The doctrine has endured volleys of criticisms about whether markets actually absorb information, leading critics to believe that the Supreme Court would eliminate it in 2014. The Court did not. In light of persistent questions about whether the doctrine reflects reality or has outlived its purpose, our empirical research tests fraud-on-the-market’s viability by investigating sports gambling: we find that the doctrine provides a sound remedy for investors in any market.
The sports wagering market operates like others in which defrauded individuals have historically failed to support their fraud claims due to a lack of reliance. We show that securities and gambling markets suffer from many of the same frailties. Chief among them is that both investors and bettors place money in markets where they lack information about deception, cheating, and fraud. And like investors rely on prices affected by fraud, gamblers reference wagering information based on the playing field: if deception enables a team to fare better or worse, this skews the betting lines on which gamblers rely. The difference between these markets, though, is that investors enjoy a body of securities law to condemn fraud.
We first argue that fraud-on-the-market would benefit most types of investable markets like sports gambling and support the doctrine in the securities context. Despite criticisms of the doctrine, our analysis shows that fraud creates the presumption of distorted prices. Second, the money wagered via sports betting and daily fantasy sports (DFS) would generate damages such that leagues would better maintain a competitive environment, boosting sports integrity akin to how securities regulations provide market protections. Also, our argument recognizes the inequity of denying sports bettors and DFS users a remedy. Whereas the leagues had traditionally benefited from gambling indirectly, today, the NFL, NHL, MLB, and NBA have partnered with DFS and other gambling industry companies. Since the leagues now benefit directly from gambling, and lucratively so, they should owe their fans a truly competitive landscape
Taxonomy of Ministerial Appointment Processes
Get PDFIn parliamentary governments, executive power rests in an executive body of ministers commonly referred to as “the cabinet” or “the government.” Cabinet ministers, including the prime minister, are tasked with researching, drafting, and proposing laws and policies to their legislative counterparts in parliament. Because cabinets are generally comprised at least partially of select members of parliament, parliamentary systems are characterized by the interactions and interdependence of the legislative and executive branches. Whereas presidential systems lean into separation of powers to restrict governmental power, parliamentary systems rely on integration of the branches to ensure that political powers remain in check. Executive policing in parliamentary systems is achieved through a variety of ministerial appointment processes and removal mechanisms. Consequently, the range of appointment processes and removal mechanisms affects the power dynamics between governmental branches, the stability of the government, and the risk tolerance of a cabinet’s policy goals. This paper focuses exclusively on the functions and varieties of ministerial appointment processes.
While ministerial appointment processes carry important implications for the government, the full range of these processes is, collectively, not well understood. This taxonomy strives to capture the characteristics of different ministerial appointment processes and understand better how they function so that countries seeking governmental reform can better understand their options. This taxonomy is based on research from twenty-five countries that were selected to represent different geographies, governmental legacies, and parliamentary structures. These countries offer both common and unique ministerial systems for consideration.
This collection of information is presented in five main sections. The paper begins with an introduction to ministerial appointment processes generally. Then, the next three sections further detail the three categories of ministerial appointment processes and explain how each category moves through the three main stages of appointing a government. Finally, the last section of the paper addresses appointment process outliers that do not squarely fit into any of the three primary ministerial appointment categories
European Cross-Sectoral Collective Bargaining as Post Crisis Policy
Get PDFThis article proposes a policy project, centered around coordinated collective bargaining at the European Union level, to redistribute income towards low-wage workers in post-crisis Europe. It suggests we allow labor unions in sectors employing low-wage workers to present common wage demands across sectors and EU Member States. It shows that this would make union wage increases less harmful to workers and consumers than under uncoordinated sectoral bargaining, while coming more directly at the expense of managers and investors. The article then describes existing EU legal institutions that although they do not quite amount to the policy proposed here constitute useful precedents for it. These institutions are European social dialogue, European Works Councils, and European Framework Agreements bargained for by multinational firms and worker representatives. The article also discusses doctrines of EU competition and internal market law that could potentially be held to prohibit European cross-sectoral collective bargaining coordination. The article lays out arguments in favor of finding such coordination lawful, so that it may form part of the EU\u27s policy arsenal to address wrenching economic inequalities worsened by the ongoing economic and health crises
