Print Issue Volume 101 - Issue 3

Note: Copyrighted Laws: Enabling and Preserving Access to Incorporated Private Standards

Traditional laws—statutes, judicial opinions, and regulations—are not eligible for copyright protection. This principle is firmly established in over one hundred years of case law, despite the Copyright Code not expressly addressing the eligibility of laws. This has caused little controversy. In the last few decades, however, federal agencies have increasingly given legal force to privately […]

Read More :: View PDF

Note: Embracing Ambiguity and Adopting Propriety: Using Comparative Law To Explore Avenues for Protecting the LGBT Population Under Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC) was initially lauded for expanding the scope of crimes considered to violate international norms; however, as inclusive as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has been for gender-based crimes, the ICC has yet to extend the same benefits to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) community. Part […]

Read More :: View PDF

Note: Getting Back to Basics: Recognizing and Understanding the Swing Voter on the Supreme Court of the United States

There is an extensive history and tradition of labeling Supreme Court Justices as “swing voters” and “swing Justices.” And yet, the content of these labels remain woefully unclear. Modern uses of the terms fall on a continuum, conveying negative to positive sentiments with no clear definition. Complicating things further, there is sometimes a conflation between […]

Read More :: View PDF

The Value of the Standard

Standard-setting organizations (SSOs) often require member firms to license their standard-essential patents (SEPs) on undefined “fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory” (FRAND) terms. Courts and commentators in turn have proposed various principles for calculating FRAND royalties, among them that the royalty should not reflect “the value of the standard.” As we show, however, this principle could be […]

Read More :: View PDF

The Substantially Impaired Sex: Uncovering the Gendered Nature of Disability Discrimination

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 was a landmark piece of legislation that prohibited private-sector employers from discriminating against qualified disabled workers. Although the Act is over a quarter-century old, legal scholars have never considered whether it has been uniformly efficacious—that is, whether the Act has served all subpopulations of disabled workers equally […]

Read More :: View PDF

Cracking the Code: An Empirical Analysis of Consumer Bankruptcy Outcomes

Chapter 13 is a cornerstone of the bankruptcy system. Its legal requirements strike a balance between the rehabilitation of debtors through keeping assets and reducing debt, and the repayment of creditors over a period of years. Despite the accolades from policymakers, the hard truth is that the majority of the half-million families each year that […]

Read More :: View PDF

The Death of the Firm

This Article maintains that the decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, which referred to the corporation as a legal fiction designed to serve the interests of the people behind it, signals the “death of the firm” as a unit of legal analysis in which business entities are treated as more than the sum of their […]

Read More :: View PDF

Misclassification and Antidiscrimination: An Empirical Analysis

This Article investigates misclassification and antidiscrimination. Misclassification is employers’ practice of classifying workers as independent contractors whom the law would categorize as employees. Misclassified workers are exempt from most federal antidiscrimination statutes, unless they file a discrimination lawsuit and seek reclassification by the court for purposes of the litigation. Thus, employers may use their classification […]

Read More :: View PDF

Note: Big Enough To Matter: Whether Statistical Significance or Practical Significance Should Be the Test for Title VII Disparate Impact Claims

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from intentionally discriminating against employees because of their race or gender. It also prohibits employers from adopting even facially-neutral employment practices that have a “disparate impact” on women or racial minorities. But what exactly is a “disparate impact”? Does this term refer to any […]

Read More :: View PDF

Note: Of Mosquitoes, Adolescents, and Reproductive Rights: Public Health and Reproductive Risks in a Genomic Age

The massive increase of microcephalic infants in recent years as a result of the pandemic spread of Zika virus has reinvigorated public responses to birth defect risks. However, the possibility of fetal abnormalities attends every pregnancy, yet public tools have not been efficiently leveraged to respond to this reality. This failure will become palpable as […]

Read More :: View PDF

© 2011-2016 Minnesota Law Review. All Rights Reserved.