Public markets, private orderings and corporate governance

In the New Property Rights approach the degree of incompleteness of markets is taken independently of the cost of the public ordering and of their efficiency relatively to private orderings. In this approach “public markets,” similarly to a Swiss cheese, are either assumed to be nonexistent empty holes (because of infinite third party verification costs) or assumed to be smooth and efficient (because of zero third party verification costs). When we allow for positive but not infinite third party verification costs we are necessarily pushed back to the insights of Commons, Coase, Fuller and Williamson. The degree of (in)completeness of public markets becomes an endogenous economic problem and managers can be seen as agents that make “second order” specific investments to run specific relations that cannot be efficiently handled by public markets. Managers and the public authorities build respectively private and public “legal equilibria” that set the working rules within which transactions can take place. Private and public legal equilibria are not only substitutes but also complements. This complementarity is an important source of the path dependency that characterizes the development of different legal systems. The framework is applied to GM’s acquisition of Fisher Body. We suggest that, contrary to the claims of the New property Rights approach, the advantages of the acquisition were not due to the superior incentives of the new private owners but should be rather related to the replacement of public markets by the new private ordering set up by Alfred Sloan.     

Going for the throat: Carnivore in an Echelon World — Part I

Carnivore is a surveillance technology, a software program housed in a computer unit, which is installed by properly authorized FBI agents on a particular Internet Service Provider’s (ISP) network. The Carnivore software system is used together with a tap on the ISP’s network to “intercept, filter, seize and decipher digital communications on the Internet”. The system is described as a “specialized network analyzer” that works by “sniffing” a network and copying and storing a warranted subset of its traffic. In the FBI’s own words “Carnivore chews on all data on the network, but it only actually eats the information authorized by a court order”. This article, in two parts, will provide an overview of the FBI’s Carnivore electronic surveillance system. The Carnivore software’s evolution, its ‘prey’ and the system’s relationship with Internet Service Providers will be the focus of the study. (Although the FBI’s Carnivore surveillance system is now officially called DCS1000, as the surveillance system is more commonly referred to as “Carnivore”, that term will be used throughout). Also addressed in the article are misconceptions about Carnivore, publicly available sniffer programs, Carnivore’s functionality, methods to counter Carnivore as well as the software’s limitations. In addition, the pertinent American law allowing for wiretapping and electronic surveillance as well as programs and policies outside the United States regarding electronic surveillance are surveyed, and an overview of ECHELON, the global interception and relay system, is provided. The aim is to provide the paper’s readers with a better understanding of these surveillance systems: naturally, only through an in-depth knowledge can the benefits and dangers they present for the public (government), private (individual communications users) and technical industry (ISPs) be understood.     

房屋拆迁补偿与公民财产权的宪法保护

房屋拆迁是对公民重大财产的剥夺,不仅涉及到公民财产所有权等民事权利的保护,更涉及到公民私有财产的宪法保护。我国宪法对公民财产权保护的制度性的不足,是导致房屋拆迁实践中种种问题的渊薮。尤其是此次修宪对“公共利益”的定义,和对征收、征用私有财产的补偿原则的缺失,使公民财产权利保护的原则在宪法层面上缺乏依据。在房屋拆迁方面,上述不足将公民房屋拆迁及其补偿造成至为不利的影响。因此,严格规制公共利益和公平补偿应当是对私有财产保护的宪法原则,也应当是房屋拆迁补偿中的核心原则。其中,拆迁补偿方式中, 原址产权调换在体现公平补偿原则方面具有特殊的重要意义。笔者认为,以原址产权调换为原则,来确定拆迁补偿方式或金额,并以此为房屋产权人户提供多种安置补偿方式,是当前解决拆迁纠纷的现实之举。     

EU citizens: Challenging the notion of German National Political Community, 1990–2005

This article assesses the extent to which Germany's adaptation of European Union legal norms through altering the criteria for access to territory and rights has challenged the judicial and conceptual boundaries of its notion of national political community. It compares the policies that directly affected EU citizens’ and other immigrant groups’ access to German territory, citizenship and social integration programs. It may be seen that, in enjoying a unique and privileged position between Germans and the other foreigners, this group not only challenges and undermines the justification for this very distinction, but also transforms the concept of ‘otherness’.     

The contract theory of patents

Two distinct theories of patents, the “reward theory” and the “contract theory,” are customarily adopted by the courts to justify the patent system. The reward theory maintains that the function of the patent system is to remunerate successful innovators so as to encourage R&D effort. In contrast, the contract theory holds that the function of the patent system is to promote the diffusion of innovative knowledge. Assuming that in the absence of patent protection innovators would rely on trade secrecy, it views patents as a contract between innovators and society whereby a property right is granted in exchange for disclosure.This paper develops an economic analysis of the contract theory of patents. To disentangle the disclosure from the reward motive for granting patents, we assume that the innovation process is entirely serendipitous, so that R&D effort is not a concern. Our main finding is that the disclosure motive alone suffices to justify the grant of patents. The optimal patent duration should strike a balance between the incentive to induce disclosure and the aim of limiting the monopoly distortion induced by patents.     

论私人财产权的法律确认与保护

私人财产权指公民个人享有的财产支配权、投资权和收益权。没有法律依据和未经法定程序均不得对私人财产进行征收、没收、查封、扣押、冻结、限制等。目前对私人财产权的法律保护的需要加强。应当通过对现有宪法、民法等部门法及司法保障制度的完善 ,加强对我国公民、个体业主、私营企业财产权的全面、系统、有效保护     

Psychological models of mental disorder, human rights, and compulsory mental health care in the community

Recent amendments to the 1983 Mental Health Act in the UK (Mental Health Act 2007) include the controversial provision for: “supervised treatment in the community for suitable patients following an initial period of detention and treatment in hospital”. This provision is widespread, and more formal, in other English-speaking jurisdictions. Reviews of the international literature, human rights considerations and the perspective of psychological approaches to mental health care suggest that proposed ‘supervised community treatment orders’ are valuable, lawful, and compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights if certain specific conditions are met. Provisions for ‘supervised community treatment orders’ in the UK should be supported, but with the provisos that: the powers of the Mental Health Act are limited as in Scotland, to persons whose “ability to make decisions about the provision of [care] is significantly impaired”, that each order is time-limited and subject to review by a properly constituted Tribunal, and that the use of such orders should represent a benefit to people in terms of more appropriate treatment, or be a least restrictive alternative, or better preserve the person's private and family life.     

The JK Rowling photo case – Are privacy rights evolving for the online era?

The Court of Appeal's recent decision in the case brought on behalf of JK Rowling's young son has some important implications for the developing law of privacy in the UK (David Murray (by his litigation friends Neil Murray and Joanne Murray) v Big Pictures Limited [2008] EWCA Civ 446). Most strikingly, the court's approach shows that the scope of potentially private information is broader than previously thought.The claim brought was for breach of confidence, misuse of private information and under the Data Protection Act 1998 (“the DPA”) and resulted from a photograph of JK Rowling's son, taken covertly in a public place, being published in a newspaper.The decision is significant for photographers and newspaper publishers, in particular, because it suggests that more types of information, especially photographs, may be capable of protection as “private”. It does not follow, however, that this development will prejudice freedom of expression: the balance between privacy and press freedom still needs to be struck, with neither taking precedence over the other.     

The legal and technological battle in the music industry: Information-push versus information-pull technologies

Peer-to-peer (P2P) technologies are often seen as a threat by copyright owners because they encourage piracy by making digital copies easier to obtain. In response, major record companies have come up with new devices designed to protect original material, and lobbied to reinforce legal protection. We view traditional distribution as an information-push technology in which the firm pays to provide information to consumers and P2P as an information-pull technology where consumers spend resources to acquire information on products they have a potential interest in by searching, downloading and testing digital copies of original products before they make their purchase decision. We determine copyright owners’ protection strategies according to the level of legal protection, and we study their effects on profits and consumers’ surplus with the two different information transmission technologies.     

The Critical Instance ‘After’ The Critique of the Subject

The central argument of this piece involves the idea that insofar as␣critique, with its two basic tropes of question and judgment, has been central to the ȁ8classical’ configuration of subjectivity, the critical instance ȁ8after’ the critique of the subject is to be found re-situated on a different philosophical terrain where the question of the question is re-thought and the logic of judgment displaced by an ethic of encounter. It is on this terrain that we can then start sketching the emergence of a different set of critical instances: critical ontologies, critical analytics and critical erotics.     

On Some Connections Between Legal Communication and Violence

The first version of this article was written and published in 1989 in Tartu in Russian.¹ As perestroika gathered strength the possibility emerged to take a fresh academic look on concepts which had been dogmatically frozen by “historical Marxism” for many years. One of those laying in the dead end was the Marxist concept of law together with its relation to violence. For a young scholar studying at Tartu University 15 years ago, there was always a possibility to try to apply some ideas and approaches drawn from Yuri Lotman’s articles and lectures. The power of his ideas and its brilliant presentation had already for years fascinated everybody dealing with problems of society and culture in Tartu. The other sources of the present analysis are the ideas about the nature of law and legal communication as they appeared in the 1920s–30s in the works of several Soviet scholars as Eugene Pashukanis and Mikhail Reisner. Both scientists were later condemned and forgotten in the Soviet Union. I also felt very comfortable with the understanding of the nature of law as “language of interaction” expressed and developed by the American lawyer and scholar Lon L. Fuller. The present article focuses only on the logic of communication based on the principle of exchange, reciprocity/contract and mechanism (code) of symbolic equalizations necessary, for achieving such reciprocity. But it is appropriate to point out that in a broader context, contract and reciprocity in society are balanced by different types of principles of human interaction. In this broader understanding, L. Fuller and Y. Lotman are close in their interpretations of cultural interaction and human communication. If we compare Fuller’s article “Two Principles of Human Association”² to Lotman’s “‘Contract’ and ‘Devotion’ as Archetypical Models of Culture”³ we see their approaches are in fact complementary.¹ Kannike, S.H., “O nekotorykh svjazjakh pravovogo obshchenija s nasilijem. Istorija I sovremennost’”, in Tartu Ülikooli Toimetised 850. Studia luridica. Historia et theoria3 (Tartu: Tartu Ülikool, 1989), 76–93² Fuller, L., “Two Principles of Human Association”, in L. Fuller, (ed), The Principles of Human Order(Durham: N.C. Duke University Press, 1981), 67–85³ Lotman, Y.M., ““Dogovor” i “vruchenie sebja” kak arhitipicheskie modeli kul’tury”, in Uchenye zapiski Tartuskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta 513. Trudy po russkoi I slavjanskoi filologii 332. Literaturovedenije: problemy literaturnoi tipologii I istoricheskoi preemstvennosti(Tartu, 1981), 3–16     

An introduction to protecting and licensing technology

Research institutions such as federal laboratories spend billions of dollars annually to develop new technologies. Recently there has been an overwhelming trend to encourage the licensing of these technologies to private industry. Without proper protection, they will be neither marketable nor licensable, as they could fall within the public domain, for free and unrestrained use. Few options effectively protect new technologies; these options are referred to as intellectual property.This article introduces basic concepts of intellectual property, with a special emphasis on patents. It considers intellectual property management and its influence on government and business.     

现行夫妻财产制的缺陷及完善

财产关系是婚姻关系中夫妻双方及与他们交易的第三人最为关注的关系之一。新颁布的《婚姻法》在原有法律规定的基础上,对其予以了补充和完善。但还存在一些不足之处,本文拟就夫妻个人财产与共同财产相互转化;夫妻财产的管理、使用、处分权限及保护;分居和约定财产制等问题作一探讨。     

从财产权保障视角论我国的宪法财产权条款

宪法财产权条款是一国宪法确立私有财产权宪法保障地位的规范依据。我国现行《宪法》第13条规定是我国宪法上的财产权条款,具有重要的规范意义。但我国宪法财产权条款采不完善的＂保障＋剥夺＂二层结构,因而应予修正,改采完善的＂保障＋限制＋剥夺＂三层结构。一国宪法财产权条款所保障的财产范围是十分广泛的,一切具财产价值的私法上的权利和公法上的权利都在其内,具财产价值的期待性权利乃至存在合法性瑕疵的财产也可以有条件地包括其内。宪法财产权条款为一国宪法上的财产权提供双重保障机制,即个别保障与制度保障、存续保障与价值保障,我国宪法财产权条款在此方面有很大的改善空间。     

The right of publicity in the digital age – Doctrinal tensions, common law theories and proposals for solutions

In the fall of 2007, a federal appeals court ruled that the use of the names and records of Major League Baseball players without license or permission by an Internet fantasy sports website was protected speech and trumped the property rights of the players. The ruling by the U.S. federal appeals court in CBC v. MLBAM marks the latest skirmish in the long-simmering tension between the scope of the “Right of Publicity,” a common-law based doctrine that has expanded over the last half-century and the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. This issue of where free speech ends and proprietary protection begins is the subject of a long line of cases – with conflicting rulings, different doctrines and a haphazard state-by-state approach. With the evolution of the Internet as a marketing and commerce tool, the economic implications of digital rights have increased the problem. This article tracks the development of the right of publicity tort, discusses the leading cases and proposes solutions.     

Optimal agency contracts: The effect of vicarious liability and judicial error

Under the doctrine of vicarious liability, a deep-pocket principal is often held responsible for a third-party harm caused by a judgment-proof agent’s negligence. We analyze the incentive contract used by the principal to control the agent’s behavior when a court can make an error in determining the agent’s negligence. We show that (1) reducing the error of declaring the agent not negligent even when he was (pro-defendant or type II error) is better than reducing the error of declaring the agent negligent even when he was not (pro-plaintiff or type I error) and (2) allowing the principal to penalize the agent even when the court declares the agent not negligent improves welfare. The latter supports the argument that causing an accident (or a reliable allegation of misconduct) should be sufficient to justify a “just cause” termination of an employee.     

A quota jury: affirmative action in jury selection

It is not too naive to believe that the use of affirmative action policies in the jury selection for the Rodney King beating trial of White police officers would have prevented the uprisings that followed their acquittal. The public outrage and riots that followed the verdict demonstrated the need for affirmative inclusion of racial minorities on jury trials to preserve and restore the public’s confidence and legitimacy of verdicts in racially motivated cases. While racially mixed juries offer many benefits, current jury selection procedures fail to provide much protection to members of racial minorities in criminal trials. From the source list to the discriminatory use of peremptory challenges, the current selection procedures provide almost no protection to racial minorities. The issue of preferential treatments of racial minorities in education, employment, and business has divided the nation and even some minority communities themselves. Affirmative action in jury proceedings and trials, however, has yet to receive much deserved attention and critical scrutiny. This article empirically examines public perceptions of possible applications of affirmative action mechanisms in criminal jury proceedings, focusing on the uses of mandatory racial quotas to engineer racially integrated juries in criminal trials. Three different types of racially mixed juries—the jury “de medietate linguae,” the Hennepin jury model, and the social science model—are examined, and the public’s perceptions of affirmative mechanisms ensuring minority participation on juries are analyzed. This article argues that the affirmative mechanism to secure racially mixed juries is essential to both the appearance and substance of fairness in criminal jury proceedings, and both the Hennepin model and the social science model are overwhelmingly supported as the ideal types of affirmative jury structures in creating racially heterogeneous juries.     

Reconfiguring the Animal/Human Boundary: The Impact of Xeno Technologies

The focus of this paper is on the symbolic and cultural as well as practical implications of what I term xeno technologies. I argue that these biomedical technologies, which aim to prolong individual human lives through the sacrifice of animal bodies, generate considerable anxiety and pose many intriguing issues for health care lawyers. In part, the concerns engendered by xeno technologies are attributable to the incalculable risks they may pose. This, coupled with public distrust of scientific evaluations of risk, undermines scientific attempts to present them as benign technologies. In this paper, however, I suggest that xeno technologies provoke a deeper cultural unease by raising, in acute new forms, historical and religious concerns about bodily mixing and rejection which challenge traditional notions of (human) self identity. The various ways in which xeno technologies render human and non-human bodies vulnerable and penetrable, pose multiple challenges to the animal/human boundary. In my view, they should force a radical re-thinking of notions of kinship, which should extend beyond the ȁ8easy caseȁ9 of human kinship with other great apes. Rather than addressing this issue, however, healthcare law makes valiant attempts to shore up the animal/human boundary. Such efforts at boundary maintenance may be traced at various sites, including the regulatory regime under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. I argue that lawȁ9s efforts to grapple with the ethical challenges posed by biotechnologies are doomed to incoherence unless it confronts the unreflective speciesism underpinning law, which designates animals as property and serves to obscure our kinship with them. My suggestion is that health care ethicists and lawyers should instead seek to expose the myriad ways in which biotechnologies may prove oppressive rather than liberatory for those who are made their human and animal subjects.