Monthly Archives: March, 2026
Maurizio Borghi, ‘The Legal Nature of Parody in Copyright Law: Learning From the Italian Way’
ABSTRACT This article examines the concept of parody in copyright law, focusing on the distinct approaches taken by the fair use system (American) and statutory exceptions (European), as well as the unique perspective of Italian jurisprudence. Both the fair use and statutory exception systems generally treat parody as a form of copying or imitation that, […]
Roee Sarel, ‘Explaining the Global Spread of Collective Litigation: A Law & Economics Perspective’
ABSTRACT This paper was developed for the workshop on ‘The Globalization of Class Actions’ (Stanford Law School, April 24, 2026). It explores possible Law & Economics explanations for why representative collective litigation procedures have spread to over fifty jurisdictions in recent decades. The analysis is organized around a simple cost-benefit inequality: a country might adopt […]
Peter Menell, ‘On the Devolution of Copyright Scholarship: Part I – Tracing the Digital Copyright Revolution’
ABSTRACT As the digital revolution unfolded in the 1990s and early 2000s, a charismatic hacktivist faction took hold in the copyright legal academy. In its purest form, the copyleft movement celebrated the notion that ‘information wants to be free’ and opposed copyright protection in cyberspace. Some copyleft scholars served as lead counsel in efforts to […]
Clark Asay, ‘Artificial Creators’
ABSTRACT Artificial intelligence systems cannot be inventors or authors under current US law. On that point, the US Patent and Trademark Office and the US Copyright Office agree. Yet beyond that, the two regimes sharply diverge. The USPTO has adopted a more flexible approach to AI-assisted invention, permitting extensive AI involvement so long as a […]
Keller and Aplin, ‘Reconciling Trade Secrets and AI Public Transparency’
ABSTRACT Poor public understanding of artificial intelligence (AI) systems has become a matter of acute concern. Even when lacking expert technical knowledge, there are good democratic, economic and other societal reasons for ensuring that the public right to know operates effectively in the AI era. Yet, the trade-secret claims of AI providers and deployers are […]
Symposium: Weinrib’s Reciprocal Freedom (Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence)
Introduction (Verónica Rodríguez-Blanco) From Private to Public Right: Resizing Correlativity and Systematicity (Aditi Bagchi) On the Possibility and the Form of Acquired Rights to External Things (Stephen Bero) How Capacious is the Kantian System of Rights? (Claudio Michelon) Private Law Adjudication, Retroactivity, and the Rule of Law (John Oberdiek) Orthodox Private Law and Social Subordination […]
‘Collective Redress and Digital Fairness’: Symposium, Transformative Private Law Blog
Collective Redress and Digital Fairness. A few opening remarks from the Blog Symposium Editors (Anna van Duin, Francesca Episcopo, Aart Jonkers and Sébastien De Rey) Digital Harms in Collective Redress: Towards a Framework for GDPR Damages (Ignacio Cofone) When the Plaintiff Is a Prediction: the EU Collective Redress Gap for Algorithmic Inference Harms (Liubomir Nikiforov) […]
Witzleb, Richardson and Rivette, ‘The Enduring Legacy of Campbell v MGN Ltd in Australian Privacy Law’
ABSTRACT This article explores the influence of the decision in Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (2004) on Australian general and statutory protections of privacy. One of the major legacies of the Campbell case is that privacy and confidentiality, while related and to some extent overlapping, should be protected through distinct causes of action. The […]
Goldin and Liscow, ‘When Should the Legal System Help Redistribute Income?’
ABSTRACT In this Essay, we consider when legal rules should be efficient and when they should not. We focus on conditions that can cause the socially optimal legal rule to diverge from the efficient legal rule – ie, the legal rule that would be optimal absent distributional considerations. These conditions include preferences or behaviors that […]
Ruhl and Salzman, ‘Property Law for Positive Externalities: Carving New Sticks for the Bundle’
ABSTRACT Property law has long confronted a troubling puzzle: Why does doctrine focus so much on eliminating harms flowing as negative externalities from uses of property – curbing pollution, nuisances, and other harmful land uses – while largely ignoring the potential to encourage positive externalities? Why such a strong focus on preventing bads instead of […]