1412 research outputs found
Sort by
Divested of Jurisdiction? The Effect of Filing a Notice of Appeal While a Posttrial Tolling Motion Is Pending Before the Trial Court
Get PDFWhat happens when there is a tolling motion under Rule 3 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure pending before a trial court and a subsequent notice of appeal is filed? As the case law currently stands, depending on which of three tolling motions is pending, the trial court may be divested of jurisdiction to rule on the motion - a divestiture that could lead the appellate court to dismiss the appeal as untimely. This Article argues that the North Carolina courts have drawn arbitrary distinctions between the different tolling motions to determine whether a trial court is divested of jurisdiction. Instead, the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure should be amended to conform with the approach laid out in the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, in which a trial court retains jurisdiction over a tolling motion even after a notice of appeal is filed and the notice of appeal does not become effective until there is an order disposing of the tolling motion
Re-examining Reasonableness: Negligence Liability in Adult Defendants with Cognitive Disabilities
Get PDFMaking Space For Good Things To Happen: A Restorative Approach To The School To Prison Pipeline
Get PDFA Case for Weakening Patent Rights
Get PDFThis Article contributes to the patent debate by observing that new and emerging technologies are radically altering the relative costs and benefits of the patent system. Although analysts cannot measure the patent system\u27s numerous absolute costs and benefits, this Article demonstrates that new and emerging technologies are significantly reducing the research, development, and commercialization costs ( innovation costs ) that are used by adherents to the incentive and prospect theories to justify the patent system\u27s existence. All things being equal, if significantly, the relative need for the patent system has decreased and will continue to decrease. Thus, this Article argues that patents should be weakened significantly-by at least twenty-five to fifty percent. To support this claim, this Article takes an interdisciplinary approach out of appreciation for the fact that innovation spans many disciplines: Two of the authors are scientists with extensive expertise in three-dimensional printing, and the remaining author is a law professor who is an expert on patent law. Altogether, this Article offers a thorough catalog of new and emerging technologies and their effects, both general and specific, on innovation costs and the patent system
A Remedy for Online Exposure: Recognizing the Public-Disclosure Tort in North Carolina
Get PDFNorth Carolina is one of only a few jurisdictions that does not recognize the tort of public disclosure of private facts—a civil remedy that protects against the offensive and unauthorized publication of private information that is not of legitimate public concern. The absence of this tort has created a gap in privacy protection in the state that is increasingly problematic with the rise of revenge porn and other online injuries made possible by the widespread use of the Internet and online social networking sites. This Comment specifically explores how recognition of the tort of public disclosure of private facts in North Carolina would give victims of revenge porn a viable civil remedy and help close the state’s existing privacy gap
The Judge Robinson O. Everett Awards Gala and Professionalism Dinner
Get PDFHonoring Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Eastern District of North Carolin
Digital Patent Infringement in an Era of 3D Printing
Get PDFThe digital revolution has now moved beyond music and video files. A person can now translate three-dimensional objects into digital files and, at the press of a button, recreate those items via a 3D printer or similar device. Just as digitization placed pressure on the copyright system, so will these digital computer-aided design (“CAD”) files stress the patent system. Patents directed to physical objects can now have their value appropriated not only by the transfer of physical embodiments but also by the transferring of CAD files designed to print the invention. We term this phenomenon digital patent infringement.
In this Article, we explore the ways the patent system can respond to protect patent owners against the appropriation of their inventions via these digital files. First, we explore whether indirect infringement doctrines sufficiently protect patent holders against these CAD files. Given the nature of likely accused indirect infringers, we conclude, contrary to earlier literature, that these doctrines likely are not up to the task.
Second, we offer novel theories of direct “digital” patent infringement based on the CAD files alone. We consider whether offers to sell and sales of these files should constitute direct patent infringement. Because such commercial activity is an appropriation of the economic value of the patented invention, we believe the law should recognize such an infringement theory. Next, rejecting the prior assumptions of the literature, we explore whether the CAD files alone should be viewed as infringement for making the patented device, given the de minimis effort it takes to create the item via a 3D printer or related device. As a technological matter, the line between the digital and the tangible has eroded to the point where the file and the item are viewed as interchangeable. Under this view, the files alone should be infringing. As a legal and policy matter, however, such expansion of patent infringement liability could have significant chilling effects on other actors and incentives, giving us pause in extending liability in this context
