Commentators and policymakers have frequently expressed serious concerns about the exclusionary potency of patents on communications protocols and interface designs for information and communications technologies (ICT). Among the proposed policy responses to potential harms arising from the exercise of such interface patents are excluding interfaces from patent protection, immunizing use of patented interfaces when necessary [...]

Black-letter law declares that a contract to perform personal services cannot be specifically enforced. Many courts, scholars, and commentators have claimed that such enforcement would constitute “involuntary servitude” under the Thirteenth Amendment. This Article, however, rejects that conventional wisdom. A careful reading of the history leading to the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment reveals that, [...]

The Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London, which upheld the power of government to condemn private property for purposes of economic development, generated a massive political backlash from across the political spectrum. Over forty states, as well as the federal government, have enacted post-Kelo reform legislation to curb eminent domain. [...]

It took nearly a century after the invention of the telephone for the Supreme Court to recognize that the Fourth Amendment could be applied to the content of private telephone conversations. Today, the Internet is in a similar state of limbo, with courts reluctant to grant Fourth Amendment protection to data placed in a medium [...]

The U.S. bankruptcy system has served as a safety net for millions of Americans for the last 110 years, but it failed to rescue homeowners in the ongoing recession. Amid fiery allegations and accusations, economists and bankruptcy judges debate the controversial modification of loans, a process called cram-down. Cram-down is a feature of bankruptcy law [...]

Over the past three years, the Federal Circuit has contributed to the rise in inequitable-conduct defenses by failing to apply the doctrine consistently. First, the court broadened the scope of the doctrine’s materiality element to include information unrelated to patentability and failed to offer guidance on how to apply multiple materiality standards. Second, the court [...]