46622 research outputs found
Sort by
House Journal
No full texthttps://scholar.law.colorado.edu/colorado-house-and-senate-journals/1604/thumbnail.jp
Trademark\u27s Grip over Sustainability
Get PDFEntrepreneurs and larger firms are waking up to the fact that there is a viable market for recycled, repaired, and even upcycled goods. There is also an increasing desire on the consumer end for more sustainable products as well as measures to reduce landfill and other product disposal harms to the environment. Although some legal barriers to this new market are being actively debated, other barriers have taken a back seat and seem primed to surge only when increased business activity exposes the liability. This is the case with trademark law, which has the potential to substantially deter the small-firm and nonprofit actors that will likely lead this aspect of used-good evergreening.
This Article investigates emergent trademark barriers that have been substantially overlooked in the current discussion regarding product renewal, which has largely been concerned with the right to repair. It considers the surprising power that the doctrines of post-sale confusion, dilution, and repair-orreconstruction possess to thwart legitimate and sustainable business activity. After reviewing the literature demonstrating that most confusion based on such legal theories is not harmful, this Article proposes some simple modifications to the current rules that would reduce uncertainty. It concludes that sustainable product lifecycles can be better supported when trademark barriers are reduced. Such a change would provide consumers with a more robust path to counter our disposable world
Naïve Realism, Cognitive Bias, and the Benefits and Risks of AI
Get PDFIn this short piece I comment on Orly Lobel\u27s book on artificial intelligence (AI) and society The Equality Machine. Here, I reflect on the complex topic of aI and its impact on society, and the importance of acknowledging both its positive and negative aspects. More broadly, I discuss the various cognitive biases, such as naïve realism, epistemic bubbles, negativity bias, extremity bias, and the availability heuristic, that influence individuals\u27 perceptions of AI, often leading to polarized viewpoints. Technology can both exacerbate and ameliorate these biases, and I commend Lobel\u27s balanced approach to AI analysis as an example to emulate.
Although AI is changing at an unprecedented rate, as exemplified by recent advances in Large Language Model (LLM) technology such as ChatGPT/GPT4, humans are adaptable, and society can actively steer toward a desirable future. By acknowledging the potential benefits and risks of AI, and by striving to overcome inherent cognitive biases, individuals can achieve a more balanced understanding of the technology and its impact on society
Boulder is for People: Zoning Reform and the Fight for Affordable Housing
Get PDFThe city of Boulder and the Colorado state legislature are both examining potential housing policies to address the growing housing affordability crisis, which reflect similar discussions in other cities and states. Zoning reform must be a central aspect of these housing policy reforms because of its impact on affordability, environmental sustainability, racial desegregation, and the economic stability of cities and states. However, passing zoning reform measures is complicated by local political opposition and the potential for unintended consequences. The best approach to pass zoning reform while ensuring that cities and states truly address housing affordability is to craft zoning reform policy that will mitigate potential negative impacts, and to pass this reform in conjunction with other housing policies. This Comment will examine why zoning reform is necessary and identify combinations of housing policies that cities and states can enact to meet their housing goals, with a focus on zoning reform possibilities in Boulder, Colorado that other cities can emulate
Environmental Evidence
Get PDFThe voices of impacted people are some of the most important when trying to make improvements to social justice in a variety of contexts, including criminal policing, housing, and health care. After all, the people with on-the-ground experience know what is likely to truly effectuate change in their community, and what is not. Yet, such lived experience is also often significantly lacking and undermined in law and policy. People with lived experience tend to be seen as both community experts with valuable knowledge, as well as nonexperts with little valuable knowledge. This Article explores the lived experience with pollution as evidence in administrative and civil judicial cases involving pollution permits. In doing so, it makes three contributions to the literature. First, it articulates a vision for thinking about evidence in pollution permit cases that is not solely focused on conventional “scientific” evidence, but also includes what this Article calls “community” evidence. Community evidence is the range of tools accessible to local communities that document the reality of their experience with pollution, such as lay witness testimony, photos and videos, demographic data, and citizen science. Second, it identifies key challenges with using community evidence in pollution permit cases in both the administrative and judicial contexts. Some cases encounter evidentiary challenges regarding relevancy, reliability, and scope, and others face more practical challenges such as lack of funding and understanding of the legal system. Third, it advocates for increased use of community evidence, in conjunction with conventional scientific evidence, as a mechanism to uplift the influence of the lived experience in pollution permit cases. Suggestions for how to do so include paying local community members for their expertise, proactively discussing community evidence in briefs and case opinions, and creating rebuttable presumptions for certain kinds of community evidence. The goal is to validate community evidence as a source of knowledge and truth worthy of consideration
Fair Domestic Allocation of Monkeypox Virus Countermeasures
No full textCountermeasures for mpox (formerly known as monkeypox), primarily vaccines, have been in limited supply in many countries during outbreaks. Equitable allocation of scarce resources during public health emergencies is a complex challenge. Identifying the objectives and core values for the allocation of mpox countermeasures, using those values to provide guidance for priority groups and prioritisation tiers, and optimising allocation implementation are important. The fundamental values for the allocation of mpox countermeasures are: preventing death and illness; reducing the association between death or illness and unjust disparities; prioritising those who prevent harm or mitigate disparities; recognising contributions to combating an outbreak; and treating similar individuals similarly. Ethically and equitably marshalling available countermeasures requires articulating these fundamental objectives, identifying priority tiers, and recognising trade-offs between prioritising the people at the highest risk of infection and the people at the highest risk of harm if infected. These five values can provide guidance on preferable priority categories for a more ethically sound response and suggest methods for optimising allocation of countermeasures for mpox and other diseases for which countermeasures are in short supply. Properly marshalling available countermeasures will be crucial for future effective and equitable national responses to outbreaks