Visions of Reality

John Clare: A Biography , by Jonathan Bate
W. B. Yeats: A Life, Volume 2: The Arch Poet , by R. F. Foster     

The ongoing design duty in Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd Casting the scope of copyright infringement even wider

The Australian Federal Court case of Universal Music AustraliaPty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd (‘Sharman’)¹is the latest in a series of peer-to-peer (P2P) filesharingcases from various jurisdictions that has found the softwaredistributor/technology provider liable for copyright infringement.² Sharman followed a few months after the groundbreaking US SupremeCourt case of MGM Studios v Grokster Ltd ³ (‘Grokster’)that had acknowledged the Sony safe harbour for technology providersbut also introduced an inducement of infringement doctrine todeal with reprehensible conduct of infringers. While both cases involved similar technology and shared a numberof similarities on the facts and legal principles⁴, a closerexamination of Sharman shows that the net of copyright infringementin P2P filesharing is cast wider than that in Grokster. The effect of Sharman is an increased burden on the technologyprovider and the potentially tremendous consequences on innovationdue to the lack of a clear safe harbour as well as the wideningof the design obligation.     

SAME‐SEX MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE: A PROPOSAL FOR CHILD CUSTODY MEDIATION*

Same‐sex marriage is a contentious, politically charged issue full of diverse, complicated considerations. In 2003, Massachusetts joined the list of jurisdictions to legalize same‐sex marriage, the first in the U.S. Now that same‐sex couples can marry in particular international jurisdictions, governments must address how to sensitively allow these couples to divorce. Same‐sex couples have a unique set of needs and issues, most clearly demonstrated if children are involved in the marriage. This Note argues for the creation of mediation programs in American jurisdictions with same‐sex marriage, to specifically determine child custody agreements upon divorce.     

PARADIGMS, POLICIES, AND PEOPLE: EXPLORING THE LINKAGES BETWEEN NORMATIVE BELIEFS, PUBLIC POLICIES AND UTILITY CONSUMER PAYMENT PROBLEMS

This article takes a step toward unifying normative and empirical policy analysis by examining the convergence of societal metatheories, public policy models, and empirical data on consumers. It begins with the premise that policies rest on a foundation of normative beliefs or metatheories that, in turn, put boundaries around the possible and give social meaning to the policies and programs that flow from them. The interaction of social metatheories about poverty and existing policies to deal with people with utility payment problems is examined. The article continues with the idea that good policy arguments are supported with empirical data and factual evidence. An empirical cluster analysis of a representative sample of consumers provides a basis for identifying the extent to which the empirical clusters conform to any or all of the metatheory‐policy linkages. The ultimate message is that theory and practice ought to demarcate where they are deductively metaphysical, based on beliefs about a subject, where they are inductively empirical, based on objective measurements relevant to the situation to which applied, and where a mixed approach is used. Linkage of the three types of information allows policy research to identify options in light of the values and metatheories on which they are based and the objective characteristics and effects on their objects of action. The implications are that when policies are based on beliefs that reflect only a part of empirical reality, implementation may fail or be inefficient and ineffective.     

“Carve‐outs” from the workers' compensation system

Decentralized regulation has become increasingly important in many areas; examples range from school vouchers to workplace safety committees to alternative dispute resolution procedures replacing courts. Consistent with this trend, in 1993 California permitted construction unions and employers to “carve out” their own workers' compensation system. This study examines California's early experience with carve‐outs by analyzing two case studies, a survey of all carve‐outs in existence during the study period, and preliminary data on costs and dispute frequency at one carve‐out. Overall, carve‐outs do not appear to harm employees, and sometimes they help. At the same time, data analysis of one carve‐out showed it had no effect on costs and dispute rates. Moreover, the low involvement of union officials and the many issues that overlap other parts of workplace regulation raise concerns about decentralizing workers' compensation. Lessons can be learned for other spheres of regulation. © 2002 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.