Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.2979/gls.2023.a886172
Seth Niemi
Managing Digital Resale in the Era of International Exhaustion Seth Niemi Introduction The Copyright Act of 1970 and Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament both guarantee copyright holders' exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution of their copyrighted material. Starting from a similar statutory basis, United States and European Union courts have diverged in their interpretation of these protections with respect to the first sale rule for digital goods. This paper analyzes the treatment of such "digital exhaustion" arguments under copyright law between the two legal systems from both the statutory interpretations employed and the policy rationales considered. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of adoption of digital exhaustion, within international law, for both copyright holders and consumers alike. I. Exhaustion Doctrine and the "First Sale" Rule The exhaustion doctrine is a long-standing tenet of American intellectual property law. The exhaustion doctrine historically acted as a common law limitation to the protection given to both copyright and patent holders whereby upon legal, unrestricted sale by the rights holder those rights were then "exhausted," and the rights holder could not further restrict resale of the good.1 The Supreme Court articulated the common law principle in the 1852 Bloomer v. McQuewan case, wherein they held that when the product in question "passes from the hands of the purchaser" the product no longer falls within the "limits of the monopoly" given by the patent.2 This doctrine, known as the "first sale" rule, arises from the understanding that an unrestricted sale [End Page 375] entitles the purchaser to "full enjoyment of that product."3 That enjoyment encompasses the use, lease, or resale of the good.4 While most individuals are unlikely to know this doctrine by name, it fits our inherent understanding of purchase and ownership.5 When we buy a product, we expect to be able to use that product as we wish and sell it again in the future without interference from the original seller.6 Patent exhaustion has been found to apply to method patents as well as the more typical exhaustion application to a utility patent. In Quanta Comput., Inc. v. LG Elecs., the Supreme Court considered the sale of computer parts produced through a process governed by a method patent.7 The Court held that patent exhaustion applies to method patents where the legally sold products "substantially embody" the patent in question.8 This reasoning concluded that, while patented methods were not "sold" in the traditional manner that goods protected by a utility patent may be sold, the underlying mechanism for patent exhaustion still exists as utility methods are not categorically exempt from the exhaustion doctrine. The sale products embodying the method patent they are produced under may exhaust that patent.9 The exhaustion doctrine and the first sale rule apply to copyright protections as well as those provided by
{"title":"Managing Digital Resale in the Era of International Exhaustion","authors":"Seth Niemi","doi":"10.2979/gls.2023.a886172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2023.a886172","url":null,"abstract":"Managing Digital Resale in the Era of International Exhaustion Seth Niemi Introduction The Copyright Act of 1970 and Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament both guarantee copyright holders' exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution of their copyrighted material. Starting from a similar statutory basis, United States and European Union courts have diverged in their interpretation of these protections with respect to the first sale rule for digital goods. This paper analyzes the treatment of such \"digital exhaustion\" arguments under copyright law between the two legal systems from both the statutory interpretations employed and the policy rationales considered. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of adoption of digital exhaustion, within international law, for both copyright holders and consumers alike. I. Exhaustion Doctrine and the \"First Sale\" Rule The exhaustion doctrine is a long-standing tenet of American intellectual property law. The exhaustion doctrine historically acted as a common law limitation to the protection given to both copyright and patent holders whereby upon legal, unrestricted sale by the rights holder those rights were then \"exhausted,\" and the rights holder could not further restrict resale of the good.1 The Supreme Court articulated the common law principle in the 1852 Bloomer v. McQuewan case, wherein they held that when the product in question \"passes from the hands of the purchaser\" the product no longer falls within the \"limits of the monopoly\" given by the patent.2 This doctrine, known as the \"first sale\" rule, arises from the understanding that an unrestricted sale [End Page 375] entitles the purchaser to \"full enjoyment of that product.\"3 That enjoyment encompasses the use, lease, or resale of the good.4 While most individuals are unlikely to know this doctrine by name, it fits our inherent understanding of purchase and ownership.5 When we buy a product, we expect to be able to use that product as we wish and sell it again in the future without interference from the original seller.6 Patent exhaustion has been found to apply to method patents as well as the more typical exhaustion application to a utility patent. In Quanta Comput., Inc. v. LG Elecs., the Supreme Court considered the sale of computer parts produced through a process governed by a method patent.7 The Court held that patent exhaustion applies to method patents where the legally sold products \"substantially embody\" the patent in question.8 This reasoning concluded that, while patented methods were not \"sold\" in the traditional manner that goods protected by a utility patent may be sold, the underlying mechanism for patent exhaustion still exists as utility methods are not categorically exempt from the exhaustion doctrine. The sale products embodying the method patent they are produced under may exhaust that patent.9 The exhaustion doctrine and the first sale rule apply to copyright protections as well as those provided by ","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135495089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.2979/gls.2023.a886169
Joshua Curtis
Abstract: Debate over the emancipatory potential of socioeconomic rights and their relevance to broader social movements is long-standing but is now picking up steam and taking on a life well beyond its traditionally legal disciplinary confines. This article contributes to the widening debate by emphasising the need for socioeconomic rights to be re-thought simultaneously outward (through deeper engagement with extant economic and political systems) and inward (by re-assessing various doctrines ingrained in their own construction). I pursue this 'two-track' methodology by first constructing a novel theory regarding the outward engagement of socioeconomic rights with competition law and policy, focusing on the collective agency of rightsholders pressing for social change through democratic means and the specifically neoliberal conception of competition. Crucially, following William Davies (The Limits of Neoliberalism) , I argue that this specific conception of competition is not just another aspect of neoliberalism but is instead the defining characteristic of the neoliberal system. The finding of incompatibility between socioeconomic rights and this conception of competition therefore implies incompatibility also with the neoliberal system, tout court. However, this systemic rejection provokes inward analysis of the surprisingly under-examined legal doctrine of systemic neutrality, positing that socioeconomic rights can be meaningfully realised in any political or economic system. Ultimately, it is argued that to have any real emancipatory relevance to broader social movements socioeconomic rights advocates, in general, must be far more forthright and logically consistent in what these rights both entail and exclude. The emancipatory promise of these rights is inherently bound to a rejection of their neutrality, legal, systemic, or otherwise, and an active, cooperative theoretical, and political engagement with more broadly emancipatory movements in a range of non-legal fields.
摘要:关于社会经济权利的解放潜力及其与更广泛的社会运动的相关性的争论由来已久，但现在正在加速发展，并远远超出其传统的法律学科范围。这篇文章通过强调社会经济权利需要同时被重新思考(通过与现存的经济和政治制度进行更深入的接触)和(通过重新评估在其自身建设中根深蒂固的各种理论)，从而有助于扩大辩论。我通过首先构建一个关于社会经济权利与竞争法和政策的外在接触的新理论来追求这种“双轨”方法，重点关注权利所有者的集体代理，通过民主手段和具体的新自由主义竞争概念来推动社会变革。关键是，根据威廉·戴维斯(William Davies)的《新自由主义的极限》(The Limits of Neoliberalism)，我认为这种特定的竞争概念不仅仅是新自由主义的另一个方面，而是新自由主义体系的定义特征。因此，社会经济权利与这种竞争概念之间的不相容的发现也意味着与新自由主义制度的不相容。然而，这种系统性的拒绝引发了对系统性中立这一令人惊讶的未被充分审视的法律原则的内在分析，该原则假定社会经济权利可以在任何政治或经济体系中有意义地实现。最后，作者认为，要与更广泛的社会运动有任何真正的解放意义，一般来说，社会经济权利倡导者必须在这些权利所包含和排除的内容上更加直率和逻辑一致。这些权利的解放承诺本质上是与拒绝它们的中立性、法律上的、系统上的或其他方面的，以及积极的、合作的理论和政治参与在一系列非法律领域的更广泛的解放运动联系在一起的。
{"title":"Socioeconomic Rights, Competition, and Systemic Neutrality: Approaching the Right(s) Contribution to Emancipatory Social Movements","authors":"Joshua Curtis","doi":"10.2979/gls.2023.a886169","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2023.a886169","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Debate over the emancipatory potential of socioeconomic rights and their relevance to broader social movements is long-standing but is now picking up steam and taking on a life well beyond its traditionally legal disciplinary confines. This article contributes to the widening debate by emphasising the need for socioeconomic rights to be re-thought simultaneously outward (through deeper engagement with extant economic and political systems) and inward (by re-assessing various doctrines ingrained in their own construction). I pursue this 'two-track' methodology by first constructing a novel theory regarding the outward engagement of socioeconomic rights with competition law and policy, focusing on the collective agency of rightsholders pressing for social change through democratic means and the specifically neoliberal conception of competition. Crucially, following William Davies (The Limits of Neoliberalism) , I argue that this specific conception of competition is not just another aspect of neoliberalism but is instead the defining characteristic of the neoliberal system. The finding of incompatibility between socioeconomic rights and this conception of competition therefore implies incompatibility also with the neoliberal system, tout court. However, this systemic rejection provokes inward analysis of the surprisingly under-examined legal doctrine of systemic neutrality, positing that socioeconomic rights can be meaningfully realised in any political or economic system. Ultimately, it is argued that to have any real emancipatory relevance to broader social movements socioeconomic rights advocates, in general, must be far more forthright and logically consistent in what these rights both entail and exclude. The emancipatory promise of these rights is inherently bound to a rejection of their neutrality, legal, systemic, or otherwise, and an active, cooperative theoretical, and political engagement with more broadly emancipatory movements in a range of non-legal fields.","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135495370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.2979/gls.2023.a886168
Louise Blichfeldt Fjord, Peter Koerver Schmidt
Abstract: The authors examine possibilities and challenges in using digital tools to obtain tax simplification and to improve tax assessment, collection, and transparency. Hence, the main objectives of the article are, from a legal perspective, to shed additional light on the relations between tax administrations and taxpayers in an increasingly digitalized world and to discuss how this development may influence taxpayers' rights and the overall efficiency of tax systems. In doing so, practical experiences—incurred in Denmark during its journey from a paper-based and manual tax administration process toward a more digitalized one—are analyzed. Against this background, it is concluded that many states around the world, including Denmark, have come a long way in making tax processes smoother and more efficient through the use of digital tools for the benefit of both taxpayers and tax administrations. However, at the same time, global as well as Danish experiences clearly show that states, in their pursuit to digitalize tax administrations further, need to take appropriate measures into consideration in order to ensure the legality and transparency of the digital tax administration processes.
{"title":"The Digital Transformation of Tax Systems Progress, Pitfalls, and Protection in a Danish Context","authors":"Louise Blichfeldt Fjord, Peter Koerver Schmidt","doi":"10.2979/gls.2023.a886168","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2023.a886168","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The authors examine possibilities and challenges in using digital tools to obtain tax simplification and to improve tax assessment, collection, and transparency. Hence, the main objectives of the article are, from a legal perspective, to shed additional light on the relations between tax administrations and taxpayers in an increasingly digitalized world and to discuss how this development may influence taxpayers' rights and the overall efficiency of tax systems. In doing so, practical experiences—incurred in Denmark during its journey from a paper-based and manual tax administration process toward a more digitalized one—are analyzed. Against this background, it is concluded that many states around the world, including Denmark, have come a long way in making tax processes smoother and more efficient through the use of digital tools for the benefit of both taxpayers and tax administrations. However, at the same time, global as well as Danish experiences clearly show that states, in their pursuit to digitalize tax administrations further, need to take appropriate measures into consideration in order to ensure the legality and transparency of the digital tax administration processes.","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135495343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.2979/gls.2023.a886162
Antonio Estella
Trust in Artificial Intelligence Analysis of the European Commission proposal for a Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Antonio Estella I. Introduction According to the European Commission, one of the main objectives of the regulatory framework that this EU institution is currently proposing in the field of Artificial Intelligence is to "increment trust in the use of artificial intelligence."1 Therefore, this paper explores the issue of trust and AI. The questions that it attempts to answer are the following. Why is trust important? Why is trust important, in particular, in the domain of AI? How does the EU Commission intend to achieve the objective of incrementing trust in the use of AI? Will the proposed regulatory framework achieve its proclaimed end? To answer these questions, this article proceeds as follows. I shall start by reflecting on the importance that trust has for society (section 2). From there, I will define what is to be understood in this paper by trust (section 3). I shall then review the basis of trust (section 4) and shall make a reference to the main sources of evidence on trust (like, surveys and laboratory experiments), and to some of the results that these sources reveal on interpersonal and institutional trust (section 5). In the next section (section 6), I shall go on to analyse specifically the issue of trust in AI, will refer to the existing evidence on the matter, and will review some of the most recent literature on this topic. In the remaining sections (sections 7 and 8), I will describe and analyse the European Commission's proposal for a regulation of AI, and in particular, the part of that proposal that deals with trust in AI. In the last section of this article, I will wrap up the whole argument of this paper and make some conclusions (section 9). The main argument that [End Page 39] will be developed in this paper is that it is inconsequential to speak of trust in AI systems. II. The Importance of Trust Trust has been defined by some authors as the "lubricant of society"2 and by others as "a kind of glue that makes society function."3 Political scientists, economists, and also lawyers have recently centred their intellectual efforts on trying to understand how trust impacts economic growth, development, democracy, justice, and even interpersonal relationships. One particularly clear expression of this renewed interest in trust is the setting up by the OECD of a High Level Group on the measurement of economic performance and social progress.4 The Group started working in 2013. This group convened eight workshops during the years 2014 to 2016. The latest one took place in Paris in June 2016 and was titled: "Measuring Trust and Social Capital." The outcome of this workshop was published in 2018, together with the rest of the reports of the other workshops that have been mentioned, under the title "Trust and Social Capital."5 In this paper, Algan gives ample evidence of how trust is positively correlated with ec
{"title":"Trust in Artificial Intelligence Analysis of the European Commission proposal for a Regulation of Artificial Intelligence","authors":"Antonio Estella","doi":"10.2979/gls.2023.a886162","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2023.a886162","url":null,"abstract":"Trust in Artificial Intelligence Analysis of the European Commission proposal for a Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Antonio Estella I. Introduction According to the European Commission, one of the main objectives of the regulatory framework that this EU institution is currently proposing in the field of Artificial Intelligence is to \"increment trust in the use of artificial intelligence.\"1 Therefore, this paper explores the issue of trust and AI. The questions that it attempts to answer are the following. Why is trust important? Why is trust important, in particular, in the domain of AI? How does the EU Commission intend to achieve the objective of incrementing trust in the use of AI? Will the proposed regulatory framework achieve its proclaimed end? To answer these questions, this article proceeds as follows. I shall start by reflecting on the importance that trust has for society (section 2). From there, I will define what is to be understood in this paper by trust (section 3). I shall then review the basis of trust (section 4) and shall make a reference to the main sources of evidence on trust (like, surveys and laboratory experiments), and to some of the results that these sources reveal on interpersonal and institutional trust (section 5). In the next section (section 6), I shall go on to analyse specifically the issue of trust in AI, will refer to the existing evidence on the matter, and will review some of the most recent literature on this topic. In the remaining sections (sections 7 and 8), I will describe and analyse the European Commission's proposal for a regulation of AI, and in particular, the part of that proposal that deals with trust in AI. In the last section of this article, I will wrap up the whole argument of this paper and make some conclusions (section 9). The main argument that [End Page 39] will be developed in this paper is that it is inconsequential to speak of trust in AI systems. II. The Importance of Trust Trust has been defined by some authors as the \"lubricant of society\"2 and by others as \"a kind of glue that makes society function.\"3 Political scientists, economists, and also lawyers have recently centred their intellectual efforts on trying to understand how trust impacts economic growth, development, democracy, justice, and even interpersonal relationships. One particularly clear expression of this renewed interest in trust is the setting up by the OECD of a High Level Group on the measurement of economic performance and social progress.4 The Group started working in 2013. This group convened eight workshops during the years 2014 to 2016. The latest one took place in Paris in June 2016 and was titled: \"Measuring Trust and Social Capital.\" The outcome of this workshop was published in 2018, together with the rest of the reports of the other workshops that have been mentioned, under the title \"Trust and Social Capital.\"5 In this paper, Algan gives ample evidence of how trust is positively correlated with ec","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"270 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135495560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.2979/gls.2023.a886173
Nicholas Thompson
Guilty of Probable Cause:Public Arrest Records and Dignity in the Information Age Nicholas Thompson The United States is exceptional among Western nations in its treatment of criminal records. Today, an estimated one-third of Americans1 bear the "modern equivalent of branding": the publicly-accessible criminal record.2 Far from remaining locked in digital limbo, these records serve a variety of purposes, from legitimate law enforcement use to extortion against arrestees seeking to scrub their mugshots from a Google search.3 It would be natural to assume that such records result from an individual's commission of a crime, for which the individual is duly convicted and then marked with the brand of the state for the transgression. But the scarlet letter of criminality enshrined in a record is often imposed in the absence of formal conviction, in the form of an arrest record. The widespread availability of these records leads to damaging collateral consequences for arrestees. This note will argue that a foundational interest in dignity, more prominent in Western European and international law than in the United States, can be a meaningful driver for criminal record reform in the United States. This paper will proceed in three parts. Part I will examine the treatment of criminal records in the United States, specifically those harms resulting from the widespread public availability of arrest records. Part II will examine Western European and international approaches to criminal records and how a robust interest in dignity has mitigated many of the issues faced in the American system. Part III will examine the opportunity for dignity to become a meaningful foundation for implementing criminal record reform in the United States. [End Page 393] I. The American Approach This section will address two problematic facets of public arrest records: widespread access and collateral consequences. Before turning to the consequences of public arrest records, it is necessary to briefly chart some of the history and scope of the access to criminal records in the United States. A. Access The Nation's central repository for criminal records is the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC), a collection of databases separated into twenty-one different "files," ranging from the National Sex Offender Registry to the Known or Appropriately Suspected Terrorists File, the Gang File, and the Protective Order File.4 The NCIC also operates the Interstate Identification Index or "Triple I," a national database that synthesizes state and federal rap sheets (lifetime records of individuals' arrests) for easier law enforcement accessibility.5 The NCIC constitutes an immense intelligence-gathering apparatus that touches nearly every aspect of actual or suspected criminal, quasi-criminal, or terrorist activity in the United States. In the early 1970s, Congress began to allow access to previously restricted NCIC criminal record data to a variety of nongovernmental or law enforc
{"title":"Guilty of Probable Cause: Public Arrest Records and Dignity in the Information Age","authors":"Nicholas Thompson","doi":"10.2979/gls.2023.a886173","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2023.a886173","url":null,"abstract":"Guilty of Probable Cause:Public Arrest Records and Dignity in the Information Age Nicholas Thompson The United States is exceptional among Western nations in its treatment of criminal records. Today, an estimated one-third of Americans1 bear the \"modern equivalent of branding\": the publicly-accessible criminal record.2 Far from remaining locked in digital limbo, these records serve a variety of purposes, from legitimate law enforcement use to extortion against arrestees seeking to scrub their mugshots from a Google search.3 It would be natural to assume that such records result from an individual's commission of a crime, for which the individual is duly convicted and then marked with the brand of the state for the transgression. But the scarlet letter of criminality enshrined in a record is often imposed in the absence of formal conviction, in the form of an arrest record. The widespread availability of these records leads to damaging collateral consequences for arrestees. This note will argue that a foundational interest in dignity, more prominent in Western European and international law than in the United States, can be a meaningful driver for criminal record reform in the United States. This paper will proceed in three parts. Part I will examine the treatment of criminal records in the United States, specifically those harms resulting from the widespread public availability of arrest records. Part II will examine Western European and international approaches to criminal records and how a robust interest in dignity has mitigated many of the issues faced in the American system. Part III will examine the opportunity for dignity to become a meaningful foundation for implementing criminal record reform in the United States. [End Page 393] I. The American Approach This section will address two problematic facets of public arrest records: widespread access and collateral consequences. Before turning to the consequences of public arrest records, it is necessary to briefly chart some of the history and scope of the access to criminal records in the United States. A. Access The Nation's central repository for criminal records is the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC), a collection of databases separated into twenty-one different \"files,\" ranging from the National Sex Offender Registry to the Known or Appropriately Suspected Terrorists File, the Gang File, and the Protective Order File.4 The NCIC also operates the Interstate Identification Index or \"Triple I,\" a national database that synthesizes state and federal rap sheets (lifetime records of individuals' arrests) for easier law enforcement accessibility.5 The NCIC constitutes an immense intelligence-gathering apparatus that touches nearly every aspect of actual or suspected criminal, quasi-criminal, or terrorist activity in the United States. In the early 1970s, Congress began to allow access to previously restricted NCIC criminal record data to a variety of nongovernmental or law enforc","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135495367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.2.0007
M. Petersmann
Abstract:This article provides ethnographic insights into the making of the latest UN-backed instrument for transnational environmental law and governance: the Global Pact for the Environment (GPE). It narrates the rise and fall of a contemporary policy project designed to unify and strengthen international environmental law. The story starts in 2015 on the premises of a Parisian legal think tank and ends in May 2019 at the headquarters of the United Nations Environment Programme in Nairobi, where states ultimately decided not to adopt the GPE as a legally binding instrument but opted to prepare a political declaration to be presented in 2022 at the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the UN Conference on the Human Environment. The time between 2015 and 2019 is divided in two periods. From 2015 to 2017, the GPE was imagined, drafted, and promoted by a group of non-state actors mainly constituted by legal academics. From 2017 to 2019, the GPE was introduced in the UN machinery and turned into a state-oriented policy process. Based on original interview material and an unexplored archive of primary sources, the article traces the multiplicity of actants enrolled in the GPE, the interests that held them together, and the institutional ties they built for the project to materialize. It draws on actor-network theory's model of translation—through problematization, interessement, enrolment, and mobilization—to reassemble the bonds between human and nonhuman actants in the making of the "global," the "pact," and the "environment." The account sheds light on the informal processes and the relational and agential dynamics at play in this laboratory of transnational environmental lawmaking, thereby illuminating and questioning the politics of policy-entrepreneurship and consensusbuilding—the tenuous and fragile modes of existence that mark contemporary international law.
{"title":"\"I Wish There Was a Treaty We Could Sign\": An Inquiry into the Making of the Global Pact for the Environment","authors":"M. Petersmann","doi":"10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.2.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.2.0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article provides ethnographic insights into the making of the latest UN-backed instrument for transnational environmental law and governance: the Global Pact for the Environment (GPE). It narrates the rise and fall of a contemporary policy project designed to unify and strengthen international environmental law. The story starts in 2015 on the premises of a Parisian legal think tank and ends in May 2019 at the headquarters of the United Nations Environment Programme in Nairobi, where states ultimately decided not to adopt the GPE as a legally binding instrument but opted to prepare a political declaration to be presented in 2022 at the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the UN Conference on the Human Environment. The time between 2015 and 2019 is divided in two periods. From 2015 to 2017, the GPE was imagined, drafted, and promoted by a group of non-state actors mainly constituted by legal academics. From 2017 to 2019, the GPE was introduced in the UN machinery and turned into a state-oriented policy process. Based on original interview material and an unexplored archive of primary sources, the article traces the multiplicity of actants enrolled in the GPE, the interests that held them together, and the institutional ties they built for the project to materialize. It draws on actor-network theory's model of translation—through problematization, interessement, enrolment, and mobilization—to reassemble the bonds between human and nonhuman actants in the making of the \"global,\" the \"pact,\" and the \"environment.\" The account sheds light on the informal processes and the relational and agential dynamics at play in this laboratory of transnational environmental lawmaking, thereby illuminating and questioning the politics of policy-entrepreneurship and consensusbuilding—the tenuous and fragile modes of existence that mark contemporary international law.","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"28 1","pages":"7 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44491951","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-11DOI: 10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0325
Badar
Abstract:Vaccinations have become a contentious issue in recent times. Although there has always been opposition to vaccines, the internet has made it possible for pseudoscience and false information to spread like never before. This has led to alarming declines in vaccine confidence and adherence rates globally. High-income countries have seen the sharpest drop in vaccine confidence rates. Factors such as the complacency effect and religious objections likely explain this decline. Most countries have attempted to raise vaccine confidence levels by enacting laws that make vaccinations for children compulsory, with strict penalties for parents who refuse to comply. In addition to vaccine mandates, the United States has the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for those who suffered injuries after receiving compulsory vaccines. Many of these policies create great friction between the government and individual liberties and do not address the rights of children at all. For these reasons, parents and children alike need a comprehensive solution that satisfies both their needs. To achieve this, states should adopt the mature minor doctrine in the context of vaccines. Schools should educate children about the safety and efficacy of vaccines to ensure that they are properly informed and increase their chances of being deemed a mature minor to bolster the effects of the mature minor doctrine. Additionally, parents whose children have been harmed by anti-vaxxers should be compensated for their suffering. This could be accomplished by fining anti-vaxxers for failure to vaccinate and using that money to create a national fund similar to the United States' current vaccine compensation program.
{"title":"Calling the Shots: Balancing Parental and Child Rights in the Age of Anti-Vax","authors":"Badar","doi":"10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0325","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0325","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Vaccinations have become a contentious issue in recent times. Although there has always been opposition to vaccines, the internet has made it possible for pseudoscience and false information to spread like never before. This has led to alarming declines in vaccine confidence and adherence rates globally. High-income countries have seen the sharpest drop in vaccine confidence rates. Factors such as the complacency effect and religious objections likely explain this decline. Most countries have attempted to raise vaccine confidence levels by enacting laws that make vaccinations for children compulsory, with strict penalties for parents who refuse to comply. In addition to vaccine mandates, the United States has the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for those who suffered injuries after receiving compulsory vaccines. Many of these policies create great friction between the government and individual liberties and do not address the rights of children at all. For these reasons, parents and children alike need a comprehensive solution that satisfies both their needs. To achieve this, states should adopt the mature minor doctrine in the context of vaccines. Schools should educate children about the safety and efficacy of vaccines to ensure that they are properly informed and increase their chances of being deemed a mature minor to bolster the effects of the mature minor doctrine. Additionally, parents whose children have been harmed by anti-vaxxers should be compensated for their suffering. This could be accomplished by fining anti-vaxxers for failure to vaccinate and using that money to create a national fund similar to the United States' current vaccine compensation program.","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"28 1","pages":"325 - 348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46630672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-11DOI: 10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0153
Stephen A. Rosenbaum, Britane Hubbard, Kaylee Sharp-Bauer, David W. Tushaus
Abstract:Myanmar's attorneys, judges, law officers, and law teachers are slowly emerging from the isolated world they inhabited during decades of military authoritarianism. Almost a decade ago, the country triumphantly burst into an era of "disciplined" democracy under the leadership of Aung San Suu Kyi, de facto head of state. Yet, the legal education system continues to be marked by hierarchical and bureaucratic practices, infrastructural and pedagogical neglect, and low confidence in the formal justice sector. The authors—two American law professors and practitioners and two students—discuss the direction of legal education in Southeast Asia and how clinical legal education (CLE) methodologies can be used to empower law students, teachers, and their communities, with an emphasis on the rule of law and access to justice. They draw on their experience in developing and piloting Community Teaching and Externship Preparation law school curricula in 2017–19 under the auspices of non-governmental organization BABSEACLE (formerly Bridges Across Borders South East Asia Clinical Legal Education Initiative). They highlight two teaching modules: Community Needs Assessments and peer-to-peer "CLE English" classes at university law departments in remote regions of the country and the outskirts of Yangon. Along with receptiveness for new approaches to teaching, learning, and mentoring by international experts, the authors faced centralized decision-making and planning, no culture of faculty collegiality or autonomy, risk aversion, reluctance to "stand out" amongst peers, frequent teacher transfers, inadequate research skills, rote learning, undue reliance on "distance education," and limited English proficiency. Lastly, the authors comment on the future potential of this educational initiative and the "Development Industry." Warning against a "Project World" mentality, unwelcome imposition of liberal ideals of individualism, and neocolonial tendencies, they highlight the importance of consultation with educational institutions, awareness of the role of local intermediaries and informal justice sector, and the need for genuine coordination and partnership amongst donor agencies and NGOs.
摘要:缅甸的律师、法官、法律官员和法律教师正在慢慢走出他们在几十年的军事独裁统治下所居住的孤立世界。近10年前，缅甸在事实上的国家元首昂山素季(Aung San Suu Kyi)的领导下，胜利地进入了一个“有纪律”的民主时代。然而，法律教育制度的特点仍然是等级制度和官僚作风，基础设施和教学方面的忽视，以及对正式司法部门的信心不足。两位美国法学教授和从业者以及两位学生讨论了东南亚法律教育的方向，以及如何利用临床法律教育(CLE)方法赋予法律学生、教师及其社区权力，重点是法治和诉诸司法。他们借鉴了在非政府组织BABSEACLE(前身为跨境桥梁东南亚临床法律教育倡议)的主持下，在2017 - 2019年开发和试点社区教学和实习准备法学院课程的经验。他们强调了两个教学模块:社区需求评估和在该国偏远地区和仰光郊区的大学法律系进行的点对点“CLE英语”课程。除了接受国际专家的新教学方法和指导外，作者还面临着集中决策和规划、缺乏教师合作或自治文化、风险厌恶、不愿在同行中“脱颖而出”、频繁的教师调动、研究技能不足、死记硬背、过度依赖“远程教育”以及英语水平有限等问题。最后，作者对这一教育倡议和“发展产业”的未来潜力进行了评论。他们对“世界计划”的心态、不受欢迎的个人主义自由理想的强加和新殖民主义倾向提出警告，强调与教育机构协商的重要性，认识到地方中介机构和非正式司法部门的作用，以及捐助机构和非政府组织之间进行真正协调和伙伴关系的必要性。
{"title":"The Myanmar Shwe: Empowering Law Students, Teachers, and the Community Through Clinical Education and the Rule of Law","authors":"Stephen A. Rosenbaum, Britane Hubbard, Kaylee Sharp-Bauer, David W. Tushaus","doi":"10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0153","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Myanmar's attorneys, judges, law officers, and law teachers are slowly emerging from the isolated world they inhabited during decades of military authoritarianism. Almost a decade ago, the country triumphantly burst into an era of \"disciplined\" democracy under the leadership of Aung San Suu Kyi, de facto head of state. Yet, the legal education system continues to be marked by hierarchical and bureaucratic practices, infrastructural and pedagogical neglect, and low confidence in the formal justice sector. The authors—two American law professors and practitioners and two students—discuss the direction of legal education in Southeast Asia and how clinical legal education (CLE) methodologies can be used to empower law students, teachers, and their communities, with an emphasis on the rule of law and access to justice. They draw on their experience in developing and piloting Community Teaching and Externship Preparation law school curricula in 2017–19 under the auspices of non-governmental organization BABSEACLE (formerly Bridges Across Borders South East Asia Clinical Legal Education Initiative). They highlight two teaching modules: Community Needs Assessments and peer-to-peer \"CLE English\" classes at university law departments in remote regions of the country and the outskirts of Yangon. Along with receptiveness for new approaches to teaching, learning, and mentoring by international experts, the authors faced centralized decision-making and planning, no culture of faculty collegiality or autonomy, risk aversion, reluctance to \"stand out\" amongst peers, frequent teacher transfers, inadequate research skills, rote learning, undue reliance on \"distance education,\" and limited English proficiency. Lastly, the authors comment on the future potential of this educational initiative and the \"Development Industry.\" Warning against a \"Project World\" mentality, unwelcome imposition of liberal ideals of individualism, and neocolonial tendencies, they highlight the importance of consultation with educational institutions, awareness of the role of local intermediaries and informal justice sector, and the need for genuine coordination and partnership amongst donor agencies and NGOs.","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"28 1","pages":"153 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43967126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-11DOI: 10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0293
Chien-Huei Wu, Po-Hsiang Liao
{"title":"Treaty Validity After Diplomatic Cutoff: The Case of the Taiwan-Panama Free Trade Agreement","authors":"Chien-Huei Wu, Po-Hsiang Liao","doi":"10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0293","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0293","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"28 1","pages":"293 - 324"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45286057","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-11DOI: 10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0029
I. Chiu, A. Kokkinis, A. Miglionico
{"title":"Debt Expansion as \"Relief and Rescue\" at the Time of the Covid-19 Pandemic: Insights from the Legal Theory of Finance","authors":"I. Chiu, A. Kokkinis, A. Miglionico","doi":"10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2979/INDJGLOLEGSTU.28.1.0029","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"28 1","pages":"29 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42899320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：