By: Christopher Civil Introduction:Â Recently, a staggering number of copyright lawsuits have been filed by producers of Â pornographic videos against individuals who have allegedly illegally downloaded the videos via the BitTorrent Protocol. While the law should respect the legitimate protection of a producerâ€™s Â copyright interest, there is significant reason to question the legitimacy of these lawsuits. Mass Â copyright infringement lawsuits such as these present significant problems relating to IP address sufficiency, personal jurisdiction, and joinder. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of mass copyright infringement lawsuits. It first provides an overview of the BitTorrent protocol and the typical proceedings in mass copyright infringement lawsuits. The paper then addresses the myriad of problems that have been identified with such lawsuits. The second half of the paper examines how courts have dealt with mass copyright infringement, and presents results from a comprehensive analysis of jurisdictions and judges that have decided the question of whether joinder is proper in such cases. Amongst other things, this examination reveals that denial of joinder is the prevailing trend. When considered in conjunction with the identified problems associated with such lawsuits, judges that deny joinder thus appear to have solid foundational support.
Reviewed by:Â Alessandra Baldini Introduction:Â In Legally Poisoned, Cranor lays out the frightening details of chemical proliferation in our modern world. In this well-researched work, the author makes clear the extent to which we are exposed to chemical toxicants, and the danger of this exposure to our health. Cranor clearly illustrates the process by which we are â€œlegally poisoned,â€ as the title says: the regulatory regime of the nation is one that assumes safety in all of the thousands of chemicals we encounter daily. It is only when harmful effects are shown after the fact that the government steps in to reduce or eliminate the use of a chemical. No effort is made to protect our citizens until some portion are injured.
By:Â Madeline Schiesser Abstract:Â This paper will discuss the apparent inconsistencies in the recent Classen v. Biogen and Momenta v. Amphastar decisions by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding the Hatch-Waxman Safe Harbor. Although it is well settled that the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration (Hatch-Waxman) Act permits a generic drug company to use the patented invention of another party to develop a generic drug for approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration (â€œFDAâ€), the courtâ€™s recent decisions have raised a question as to whether the safe harbor may protect activity subsequent to FDA approval of the generic drug. Clarification is needed on this issue and should to be provided forthwith by the judiciary. Without judicial guidance, the institutions responsible for the development and financial support of new and generic pharmaceuticals will be plagued by both legal and business uncertainty, which will adversely affect all stakeholders, including patentees, generic drug companies, and consumers.
By: David Hutchinson Introduction:Â On March 18th 2012 â€œthe galaxyâ€™s most resilient Bit Torrent site,â€Â The Pirate Bay declared war on copyright laws around the world. It threatened to take its Bit Torrent piracy programs to the sky in order to avoid jurisdiction. Bit Torrent is a system by which Internet users can connect to one anotherâ€™s computers to share files.Â Users visit a website, such as the aforementioned The Pirate Bay, and can then access torrent files from the websiteâ€™s network of users.Â One user must create a Torrent file of the content he or she wishes to share.Â That file then serves as a guide for other users on a given network to access and download the content.Â Each time a file is downloaded from the user, a copy is made which increases access for the next user seeking to download the same content. A user can then download a number of fragments of each file from a number of different users until the download is completed, making the process rather quick.Â The more users in a given network, the more access a user has to fragments of a desired file, and the faster that user is able to download that particular file.Â Due to the quick nature of the downloading process, as well as the user driven content stream, Bit Torrent has become the most popular type of peer-to-peer downloading system for copyright protected files.
By: Stephen Burke Introduction:Â Â The United States International Trade Commission (hereinafter the â€œITCâ€) is a government agency with statutory power to control matters of trade.Â As a part of this power, the ITC may investigate claims of patent infringement and ban infringing products from being imported into and/or sold in the country.Â The patent investigation power of the ITC was seldom utilized by litigants before the turn of the 21st century, who instead preferred to file complaints in federal court.Â With the technology boom of the 1990s and the mounting international competition into the new millennium, the ITC has seen a steadily increasing volume of patent claims.
By: William Samore Introduction:Â In the summer of 1956, leaders in the field of computer science met at Dartmouth College and founded the field of Artificial Intelligence. Since then, one branch of Artificial Intelligenceâ€”Genetic Programmingâ€”has progressed to the point where it could drastically change the way that inventors design and create. Genetic programs (described in more detail in section III.B of this paper) operate by mimicking the biological evolutionary process and have a wide variety of applications. Antenna design, for example, is a field where genetic programming could radically change the nature and pace of innovation. The first antennas were built in the late 1800's by Heinrich Hertz, and an antenna with a specific shape can be designedÂ to emit a desired radiation pattern.Â As technology progressed, computer programs were designed where an antenna's characteristics could be inputted to the computer program, and the radiation pattern would be calculated and displayed to the user. Now, computer programs have gone one step further, making it possible to do the reverse: input a desired radiation pattern and have the computer program itself design the antenna. The question that this note asks is, can changes in the tools available to inventors render previously patentable ideas obvious and therefore unpatentable? In other words, should an antenna, which could only have been designed by a human at one point but now can be designed by a computer, be patentable?
By: Allison Gaul Abstract: Â As technology develops, the spectrum of potential uses for information warfare will broaden. Creation of new applications for weaponized bits and bytes will inevitably result in the generation of new legal questions. The information warfare scenarios discussed in this article are a sample of the possible uses for digital attacks. It does not address every potential legal factor but instead examines the basis for applying the Law of Armed Conflict to information warfare that involves neutral states. Specifically, the article examines whether the Hague Convention of 1907 and subsequent Hague Rules Regarding Aerial Warfare, as pillars of the LoAC, can be reasonably applied to information warfare involving neutral states.
By:Â Blaine Bassett Introduction:Â SPOILER ALERT: A revolution is transpiring that will leave television so changedÂ twenty years in the future as to make it unrecognizable to viewers from twenty years in the past.Â What is more, this proposition is hardly controversial. The ubiquity of the phrase â€œSPOILERÂ ALERTâ€ itselfâ€”now commonly applied in reference to scripted television shows, realityÂ shows, sports contests, and other television programs to warn those who have not yet watched Â the referenced program that possibly unwanted plot disclosures are to followâ€”illustrates theÂ reality of the television revolution as well as anything. When people limited their televisionÂ viewing to live television programs on the days and times scheduled by television stations, thereÂ was no need for such a phrase in the television context. But â€œSPOILER ALERT" is seenÂ everywhere today because, to exaggerate only slightly, â€œthe nationâ€™s greatest secrets no longerÂ are housed in military installations. They exist in the last seven minutes of . . . television shows.Â The countryâ€™s greatest fear is . . . accidentally hearing what happened 20 minutes into your third favoriteÂ television show on Wednesday nights, the ending everyone else watched two daysÂ ago.â€
Reviewed by: Matt Galante Summary:Â The author provides an excellent summary of the international law framework guiding the safe transfer of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes between nation states. The author discusses the many benefits and uses of nuclear technology and the importance of sharing such technology throughout the world. The author focuses her legal analysis on the substantive components of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the standards outlined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The book ends with an examination of case studies involving the use of transferred nuclear technology in Iraq, Iran, and Israel.
By:Â Daniel B. Garrie and Candice M. Lang Abtract:Â This article analyzes the Federal Circuitâ€™s Model Order regarding E-Discovery in patent cases (the â€œModel Orderâ€). The article (i) briefly describes the purpose behind the Model Order, (ii) describes its key provisions, and then (iii) analyzes the Model Order to identify some areas of continuing concern. The authors conclude that, while it is beyond refute that the Model Order is a step in the right direction in the courtsâ€™ efforts to control and manage e-discovery, the Model Order is only a first step. In this regard, several problems, as set forth below, can potentially arise when counsel or the courts use the Model Order. It is hoped that this article will encourage judges, litigants, and other interested parties to continue trying to solve some of the still troubling aspects of e-discovery and e-discovery abuse.