Protecting and Supporting Children in the Child Welfare System and the Juvenile Court

The impact of childhood trauma can be substantial and long term. Prevention of additional trauma should be the guiding principle for all professionals working with children in the child welfare and juvenile court systems. This article addresses ways these two systems can protect and support children before they enter the courtroom. This is accomplished by obtaining, sharing, and utilizing a complete trauma history on the child, as well as putting measures in place to protect against system‐generated trauma. It will also address how to reduce the trauma associated with testifying using psycho‐educational programs, and involving a caring, sensitive judge.     

Deliver us from Evil: Protecting the Child When Both Parents Ignore the Order of Protection

Orders of protection are regularly utilized to protect victims of domestic violence as well as their children, by restricting the subject from contact or specific activity with the protected parties. Unfortunately, it is common for the adult protected party to facilitate the violation of these orders in an effort to reconcile with the subject, placing children in danger. This undermines the protection that these orders were intended to offer; without penalty to the protected party. This Note proposes a model statute penalizing any party who knowingly endangers children by facilitating the violation of any order of protection; family or criminal.     

Protecting Childhood: Rights,Social Goals and the First Amendment in the Context of the Child Online Protection Act

In Dun & Bradstreet v. Greenmoss Builders, the Supreme Court of the United States reintroduced a subject matter test into libel law, holding that private figures defamed in the discussion of matters of private concern did not need to prove actual malice to collect punitive or presumed damages. The sweeping language of some of opinions, coupled with the Supreme Court's references to subject matter in subsequent cases, led to confusion over whether and how constitutional protections apply in private plaintiff-private issue cases. This article explores how lower federal and state appellate courts have interpreted Dun & Bradstreet and offers three alternate solutions to appropriately balance the First Amendment rights of defendants with the reputational interests of private plaintiffs in cases arising from the discussion of matters of private concern.     

Protecting Ohio's Children: Ohio Juvenile Court Jurisdiction to Prevent Nonparty Interference in the Protection of the Best Interest of a Child

Ohio Rule of Juvenile Procedure 2(Y) allows juvenile courts to do what other courts cannot: designate additional parties to an action, allowing juvenile courts to better accomplish their statutory purpose of pursuing the best interests of children. However, sometimes this can lead to confusion about juvenile courts’ actions to protect children, especially when courts invoke Rule 2(Y) to stop interference with proceedings. This article will examine the historical foundations of Ohio's juvenile courts, the unique authority that they possess, and the conflicts that can arise due to interference with juvenile court proceedings. Ohio's juvenile courts have unique authority, and they can use that authority in a way that does not conflict with constitutional rights, while still working to protect the interests of children.     

动漫角色法律保护之探讨

动漫作品中的原创角色已成为最具商业利用价值的元素之一,其知识产权保护问题主要涉及版权和商标两个方面。将动漫角色作为独立的著作权保护需要满足一定的判断标准。商标法可以为角色提供交叉保护,具备显著性的角色形象元素都可以获准注册,且可以克服版权保护期限限制等的障碍。然而对知名角色形象的交叉保护带来了过度保护的弊端,因此在立法和司法实践中应合理界分作者、商标权人的权利和公有知识领域的关系,兼顾激励创新和促进角色利用两个目标的实现。     

Protecting the procedural rights of victim

Criminal procedure law of the People＇s Republic of China prescribed victim the status of procedure, and gave them more procedural rights. But it＇s insufficient. It＇s important to give them more procedural rights, e.g. right of appeal.     

Protecting the Internet with international law

The Internet remains the odd child of international law. While forever more universal law venues such as conferences, edited volumes or research projects consider “the Internet” a peculiar, interesting aspect of its well-recognized disciplines, international scholarship fails to address the global network as a whole, stalling the application of the fully developed and well-suited international law apparatus to the global community's biggest contemporary challenge. “Internet governance” is still perceived by legal scholars as construed to international relations and, at best, a potential ground for soft law in a distant future. That is not the case: Internet governance, with all its challenges, has been shaping international law for almost two decades. The latest unveilings of the ways in which the Internet impacts global policies and laws caught the public eye with the 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal and, previously, with the 2013 Snowden revelations, yet as surprising as they might have been to the average user, they are direct results of network's architecture and its governance model. This paper looks at the evolving concept of “Internet's public core” as an opportunity to bridge this dogmatic gap. We identify the scope and meaning of “Internet's core” and assess its legitimacy within existing international normative frameworks. We argue that the technical components crucial to the flawless operation of the global network, such as the Domain Name System and Internet's backbone networks, can be effectively protected with international law.     

Protecting Battered Women

Abstract

Summary. Domestic violence is a major societal problem that affects millions of people. The American legal system is attempting to assist victims of domestic violence by designing laws that offer various types of protection. The civil laws have been expanded to provide protection to more people, such as dating partners, same-sex couples, and people who offer help to victims. In addition, a victim of domestic violence can seek a particularized form of relief, designed for their specific situation. The laws will vary between jurisdictions, but the movement is towards more complete and effective laws that assist people who are in violent situations.     

保护竞争而不保护竞争者?——对主流反垄断法观点的审视

"保护竞争而不是竞争者"被奉为反垄断法的原则。受此影响,我国反垄断法的宗旨中并不包括保护竞争者。"保护竞争而不是竞争者"被误读,通过将其还原到原始文本之中、联系上下文来考察其真正含义后,并不能得出"不保护竞争者"的结论。从反垄断法的价值体系来看,"保护竞争者"和"保护竞争"属于不同层次的价值目标,二者并不矛盾。"保护竞争而不是竞争者"最初在审理企业并购案件中提出,即便在经营者集中制度中适用,也不能任意扩展到反垄断法的其他制度,因为从垄断协议和滥用市场支配地位制度来看,对"竞争者"的保护是其必然要求。     

论附保护第三人作用的契约

契约相对性原则历时已久 ,现代社会中附保护第三人作用契约又为其注入了新的活力。从探索该制度的产生诱因、形成经过及适用标准出发 ,对其制度作用进行了考察 ,经过分析 ,提出我国有必要引入附保护第三人作用契约。     

浅论罪犯权利保护

在建设社会主义法治国家的进程中,全社会的权利保护意识日益增强,广大公民运用法律武器维护自身合法权益的现象越来越普遍。作为特殊公民的罪犯,其维权意识也日渐增强。但是,在罪犯权利保护上,还存在这样那样的问题,其中最突出的一个问题就是:从漠视、淡化罪犯权利,片面追求刑罚的打击、震慑效果,重严格管理,轻文明管理,回避罪犯权利保护的极端,走向夸大、泛化罪犯权利,在罪犯维     

论保护有效竞争的基本方法

就保护有效竞争的方法而言,各国反垄断法在立法体例上早就有行为主义和结构主义之分。其中行为主义反垄断法律制度以重点规范市场行为为基本特征,而结构主义反垄断法律制度以重点规范市场结构(市场集中程度)为基本特征。但从当今各国的反垄断实践来看,他们的选择突出表现为行为主义和结构主义的结合。     

论公司法上债权人保护制度

保护公司债权人的利益是公司法立法宗旨之一。我国公司法中的债权人保护制度不尽完善,且其有效性受到了前所未有的质疑和挑战。因此改变主要依靠公司资本三原则保护公司债权人的制度体系,强化公司设立、运营、清算等各个阶段公司债权人的保护制度,并增加公司人格否定制度,强化公司董事责任制度,建立公司债债权人保护制是完善我国公司法上债权人保护制度的几个重要方面。