[IPLaw] 3/18-4/1 Eligibility and Acquisition

Reading: Textbook ch.7-8

Questions:

  • Are photos taken by 1-year-old children, blind people copyrightable? How about non-human animals?
  • How about a spillage on the sidewalk? What if it’s done by a street artist?
  • Is it a good idea to protect computer programs by copyright?
  • Should a doctor be allowed to patent a new medical procedure?

 

Advertisements

[IPLaw] 3/4&11 Properties, Rights & Legal Systems

Reading: Textbook ch.3-6

Pre-class Questions:

  • If copyright law and patent law are meant to protect creativity & innovation, why have developing countries, generally speaking, been halfhearted in copyright/patent protection?
  • What main differences do you find between IP rights and traditional property rights (in addition to what the textbook says in particular)? Why?
  • Why would nations rush to make IP treaties in late 19th century and late 20th century respectly?

 

[IPLaw] 2/25 Evolution and Overview

Pre-class Questions:

  • How could ancient civilizations (like China, Egypt, India etc.) flourish without something similar to modern IP protection regimes?
  • (A related–though technically out of scope for this course–question: is private property a necessity?)
  • What industry, profession, country … will likely suffer the most should the world decide to abolish patent, copyright, or trademark law all of a sudden? Why?

 

[LRTW] 9/27 Major Resources for Legal Research

Exercises:

  • US v. Apple, Inc., 791 F.3d 290 (2d Cir. 2015).
  • David Eisenstadt, James Langenfeld, The Role of Economics in Truncated Rule of Reason Analysis, 28-SUM Antitrust 52 (2014).
  • Cellophane Fallacy case.
  • Polygram Holding v. FTC, 416 F.3d 29 (D.C. Cir., 2005).
  • 148 F.2d 416.
  • 148 F.2d at 421.
  • Charles Reich, The New Property (1964).
  • Coase, The Problem of Social Cost (1961).
  • Christine Jolls, Cass R. Sunstein & Richard Thaler, A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics, 50 Stan. L. Rev. 1471 (1998).
  • Articles by Justice Sotomayor.
  • Articles citing Warren & Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 193 (1890).
  • Articles citing Ely’s “Democracy and Distrust.”
  • Most recent article by Bill Simon of Columbia Law.
  • Articles published by Columbia Law School in the last 30 days.
  • 有關同性婚姻與多元家庭的文章。
  • 有關廢除死刑的文章。

Homework:

  • 研讀大法官釋字 748號解釋,並整理解釋理由與一個(部分)不同意見書之論點大綱.

[LRTW] 9-20 Thesis Construction

Homework

  • Read the opinion of the court in United States v. Grinnell Corp. (your antitrust law assignment), and write a 1-paragraph summary, in Chinese, of the facts (no more than 10 lines).
  • Write another summary of the court’s opinion in Part I (again, 1-paragraph, in Chinese, 10 lines or less).
  • Submit your summaries to the mailing list by the end of Sun. (9/17).
  • Prepare a 3-5 min. short talk, in English, commenting on the court’s opinion. (Feel free to take cues from the dissenting opinions.)

[LRTW] 10/5 Major Resources for Legal Research

Exercises:

  • United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563, 86 S. Ct. 1698 (1966).
  • Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS (2007).
  • United States v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.
  • Polygram Holding v. FTC, 416 F.3d 29 (D.C. Cir., 2005).
  • 148 F.2d 416.
  • 148 F.2d at 421.
  • Charles Reich, The New Property (1964).
  • Coase, The Problem of Social Cost (1961).
  • Christine Jolls, Cass R. Sunstein & Richard Thaler, A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics, 50 Stan. L. Rev. 1471 (1998).
  • Articles by Justice Sotomayor.
  • Articles citing Warren & Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 193 (1890).
  • Articles citing Ely’s “Democracy and Distrust.”
  • Most recent article by Bill Simon of Columbia Law.
  • Articles published by Columbia Law School in the last 30 days.
  • 有關同性婚姻與多元家庭的文章。
  • 有關廢除死刑的文章。

Homework:

  • 研讀大法官釋字 689號解釋,並整理解釋理由與一個(部分)不同意見書之論點大綱.

[LRTW] 9-21 Thesis Construction

Homework

  • Read the opinion of the court in United States v. Grinnell Corp. (your antitrust law assignment), and write a 1-paragraph summary, in Chinese, of the facts (no more than 10 lines).
  • Write another summary of the court’s opinion in Part I (again, 1-paragraph, in Chinese, 10 lines or less).
  • Submit your summaries to the mailing list by the end of Mon. (9/19).
  • Prepare a 3-5 min. short talk, in English, commenting on the court’s opinion. (Feel free to take cues from the dissenting opinions.)