December 18, 2015
Professor Eva Subotnik’s article, Copyright and the Living Dead?:
Succession Law and the Postmortem Term, forthcoming shortly in the Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, was reviewed on PrawfsBlawg by Andrew Gilden.
In her article, Subotnik argues that succession law principles provide discrete, though qualified, support for a postmortem copyright term and that more precision should be used in categorizing the costs associated with postmortem protection. In particular, in many instances, the costs should be conceptualized as resulting from suboptimal stewardship by the living rather than from dead-hand control.
In his post, Gilden writes that “Subotnik’s article makes at least two important contributions to the literature: First, she brings copyright law more explicitly into conversation with trusts & estates theory and scholarship….Subotnik provides some useful new ways of using succession law to think about the very long postmortem copyright term, and her article more broadly reads as a blueprint for some fruitful conversations between and among copyright and T&E scholars….Second, Subotnik’s article begins the useful task of disaggregating the initial ‘life’ term from the ‘plus 70.’…As Subotnik observes, succession laws generally recognize the strong desire for individuals to provide for their loved ones, the sentimental attachment to particular items, and an interest in preserving legacy. Structuring copyright around a postmortem term might accordingly provide a qualitatively different set of incentives than the financial incentives typically acknowledged in the case law.…Definitely worth a read!”
April 29, 2015
Professor Mark L. Movsesian’s post, “Thomas More, Villain,” was quoted in a Washington Post story by David Gibson,
“Will the PBS Series, Wolf Hall, Tarnish Thomas More’s Halo?“
March 13, 2015
On March 4, Professors Christine Lazaro and Ben Edwards co-authored a post
CLS Blue Sky Blog, Columbia Law School’s Blog on Corporations and the Capital Markets, entitled “The Fragmented Regulation of Investment Advice: A Call for Harmonization.” The post is based on their article of the same title, which is forthcoming in the Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review. Here’s the start of the post:
Discussions about regulating investment advice have largely focused on whether to harmonize the laws governing two categories of individuals within the securities world—registered investment advisers and stockbrokers. The discussion has overlooked insurance brokers who often times also provide investment advice. Lazaro and Edwards broaden the focus by arguing that harmonizing the regulation of investment advice necessarily requires reforms reaching beyond securities regulation and into insurance regulation as well. They argue that consistent standards should govern the investment advice provided to retail investors regardless of who is giving the advice.
March 12, 2015
On February 26, Professor Christine Lazaro participated in the Securities Arbitration Commentator Podcast, “WHITHER (OR WITHER) THE FINRA MEDIATION PROGRAM?
” George H. Friedman, former FINRA Director of Arbitration and long-time SAC Board of Editors member, moderated the discussion. In addition to Professor Lazaro, panelists included: mediator Roger M. Deitz, Esq.; Linda Drucker, Esq., Associate General Counsel, Charles Schwab & Co. Inc.; and Joe Peiffer, Esq., Partner, Peiffer Roca Wolf Abdullah Carr and Kane, LLC. SAC chose as the topic of discussion securities mediation today, in general terms, but, more specifically, the continuing role of FINRA’s Mediation Department. FINRA’s mediation program – the first in the securities field – is celebrating its twentieth anniversary this year. Over the past two decades, over 17,000 disputes have been referred to FINRA mediation. As we enter 2015, the program is at a crossroad. The number of staff dedicated to mediation has declined and competitors have emerged in the form of other dispute resolution providers and, even, the mediators themselves.
The program began with an overview of the history of the mediation program at FINRA. The conversation turned next to the contribution that technology now makes to securities mediations and the prospects for the future. Mr. Friedman ended the mediation podcast with a roll call of the panelists on what they foresee for securities mediation and FINRA’s Mediation Department five years from now.
February 20, 2015
Professor Nina Crimm and Professor Laurence H. Winer (Arizona State University, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law) have written a post on their recently published book, God, Schools, and Government Funding: First Amendment Conundrums (Ashgate, 2015). The post was noted on SCOTUSblog’s Wednesday round-up.
January 23, 2015
In an American Banker op-ed, Consumers Fare Better with Arbitration, Alan Kaplinsky, Mark Levin, and Daniel McKenna, lawyers from Ballard Spahr, a leading firm representing banks and others in the consumer financial services industry, commented on the St. John’s Arbitration Study, and responded to an earlier American Banker op-ed authored by Professor Jeff Sovern. Sovern rebutted in another American Banker op-ed, Arbitration Tricks Consumers into Giving Up Their Rights. In addition, Maryland law professor Peter Holland offered his own views on the study in a blog post.
September 25, 2014
ContractsProf Blog has organized a virtual symposium on Omri Ben-Shahar’s and Carl Schneider’s book, More That You Wanted to Know: The Failure of Mandated Disclosure. So far, ten scholars have provided posts, including professors from Georgetown, NYU, Minnesota, Fordham, Cornell, Washington, Iowa, and other law schools. Professor Jeff Sovern’s contribution is about whether single-letter grade disclosures, such as those seen at the entrances of New York City restaurants, are a useful form of disclosure.
December 5, 2013
Christopher Borgen, Professor and Associate Dean for International Studies, has written this piece on Opinio Juris on the recent protests in Ukraine. Professor Borgen analyzes the tug of war between the EU and Russia over Ukraine, and what it tells us about the evolution of geopolitics and international norms.
November 18, 2013
Professor Jeremy Sheff‘s Stanford Law Review article, Marks, Morals, and Markets, has been identified by Professor Laura Heymann as one of the best works of recent scholarship relating to Intellectual Property, in a review published today in Jotwell: The Journal of Things We Like (Lots). Describing Professor Sheff’s article as “thoughtful and sophisticated”, the review concludes,
Sheff does not purport to set forth an all-encompassing theory, but his proposal is highly compatible with the way we now talk about brands. We are ever more in a world in which consumers engage with many brands as personas. Brands are trusted confidants and comforting companions. They find allegiances with different social groups at different times in their development; they uplift us and betray us. These brands are not simply a way of finding goods in the marketplace; they are also a way of announcing or defining one’s identity, creating relationships with others, signaling wealth, or engaging in any one of a number of expressive functions. Companies respond in kind, by creating advertising or affinity groups that foster this type of engagement, and by aggressively using trademark law as a kind of corporate defamation law, pushing back at uses that offend their view of their brands. If these are our relationships with brands today, then perhaps we should be characterizing their relationships with us as ones of promise, representations, and trust. The difficulty will then be in determining which promises we truly expect brands to keep.
November 12, 2013
Last week, Professor Margaret “Peggy” McGuiness, Co-Director of the law school’s Center for International and Comparative Law, participated in a podcast on United States v. Bond, which is currently before the United States Supreme Court. The Court heard oral argument in Bond on November 5. Bond considers Congress’s treaty powers and competing interpretations of the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act. The podcast is featured on the Opinio Juris, the international law blog that Professor McGuinness co-founded with Professor Christopher Borgen.