199 research outputs found
Sort by
The Constitutionality of Panhandling Ordinances: Making "Cents" Out of Reed v. Town of Gilbert
Get PDFN/
The Use of Public-Private Partnerships as a Model for the Delivery of Goods and Services to the Government - Is This a New Concept in Government Contracting?
Get PDFN/
Corporate Manslaughter by Industrial Robots at Work: Who Should Go on Trial under the Principles of Common Law Australia?
Get PDFIndustrial robots have been increasingly used for decades and the International Federation of Robotics predicts that 1.3 million more of such humanoids will be installed in factories across the globe between 2015 and 2018. While robots are deemed beneficial for industrial production, they pose a serious threat to our health and safety. Meanwhile, robots have killed many people and gravely injured numerous others in different countries. Policymakers around the world remain largely unmoved about resolving the uncertainty over the specificity of which persons should go on trial for such killings. This article examines the principles of common law governing manslaughter by criminal negligence with particular reference to Australia; however, it will generally apply to other common law countries as well. It finds that while it would be theoretically possible to identify the potential accused of workplace deaths caused by robots, we consider that the common law identification doctrine in practice will be a bar to successful prosecutions against corporate employers given the specific complexities associated with the usage of industrial robots. This article therefore submits a recommendation with justifications for dealing with this serious offence by enacting appropriate manslaughter law for the effective regulation of robots provoked fatalities.
Trademarks as Sources of Market Power: Drugs, Beers and Product Differentiation
Get PDFThis Article defines the notion of market power and how in conjunction with trademark rights give rise to elements that are deemed anticompetitive in a free market society. This Article uses legal arguments to consider how important developments in antitrust economics, particularly product differentiation and monopolistic competition, have contributed to the notion that trademarks are a source of market power. The Article uses a number of cases in the field of trademarks to underscore the key points that trademarks are a source of market power. These case developments contribute to the monopolistic tendencies of trademarks and describe how such tendencies are associated with the theory on market power and product differentiation. Empirically, the Article examines beer products from a single large corporation and the various trademarks/brands to determine whether such brands are a source of market power, effectively giving that manufacturer a monopoly on the beer market. A discussion of product hopping in pharmaceuticals is used to supplement the theories and evidence from the beer market. The Article also develops a theory of branded monopoly and suggests that, as a result of single ownership of trademarks and brands that are abundant from a single owner trademark’s market power, questions relating to antitrust foreclosure are often raised, despite the fact that market power is not anticompetitive per se. If it is recognized that trademarks are a source of market power, and hence, a core concern for antitrust law and policy, then the legal foundations of the current trademark system would need a radical redesign. If, on the other hand, it is recognized that trademarks are a source of market power, but do not conflict with antitrust law, and antitrust enforcers are to ignore conducts such as market foreclosure and other barriers to entry as a result of excessive trademarks and brands, then both antitrust and trademark law can continue to co-exist in the current system.
Hardly Room for Hardship - A Functional Review of Article 79 of the CISG
Get PDFOver a decade ago, Francesco Mazzotta penned a penetrating article on the issue of determination of interest rate under Article 78 of the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), which pierced academic discussions at the time, and won a much deserved Schmitthoff research award. It was appropriately entitled: "CISG Article 78: Endless disagreement among commentators, much less among the courts." After finding a similar phenomenon of "much ado about nothing," in relation to the application of Article 79 and the issue of hardship, the authors were inspired to undertake a similar debunking of a similar myth, in Mazzotta\u27s vein. We hope it may inspire others to pursue pragmatic and empirical research issues
