The Meanings of the Logical Constants in Deontic Logic

If deontic logic is to cast light on any of the normative sciences, such as legal reasoning, then certain problems regarding its logical constants must be faced. Recent studies in the area of deontic logic have tended to assume that it is our responses to the paradoxes of deontic implication which are fundamental to resolving problems with the use of deontic logic to investigate various branches of normative reasoning. In this paper I wish to show that the paradoxes are of secondary importance; that they are merely by-products of the central issue, namely the ability of certain syntactic forms to embody natural language structures used in reasoning about norms. An investigation of modal syntax is proffered as the best starting-point from which to tackle the questions that still dog the legitimacy of deontic logic. Part I provides some philosophical background to the discussion of deontic logical constants. Part II addresses in greater detail issues concerning the representation of normative concepts; and Part III offers a few remarks on the general issue of deontic logic's fruitfulness as an analytical tool.     

Trademarks as Sources of Market Power: Legal and Historical Encounters

Although the history of trademarks is well catalogued in various review articles and books in different jurisdictions, one particular missing link is whether trademarks are sources of market power—from a historical perspectives. This article addresses exactly that question, and presents some of the legal encounters that support the historical narrative that trademarks are sources of market power, by examining selected trademark cases—centuries apart in England and the United States. The overall purpose of these discussions is aimed at situating the law and policy of trademarks in the antitrust regime when significant historical trademark cases are brought into the equation and whether a prediction can be made that trademarks are increasingly heading into a clash with the antitrust regime.     

A Real Options-Driven Theory of Business Incubation

This article employs real options-theoretic reasoning to develop a theory of business incubation. This theory seeks to predict and explain how business incubators and the process of business incubation increase the likelihood that new ventures will survive the early stages of development. It conceptualizes the incubator as an entrepreneurial firm that sources and macro-manages the innovation process within emerging organizations, infusing these organizations with resources at various developmental stage-gates while containing the cost of their potential failure. The incubator is the unit of analysis while incubation outcomes—measured in terms of incubatee growth and financial performance at the time of incubator exit—provide indicators of success. Our model of the incubation process and specification of the range of possible incubation outcomes offer implications for managerial practice and policy-making vis-à-vis incubator management and good entrepreneurial failure.     

Esophageal injury in fatal rear-impact collisions

Neck injuries resulting from motor vehicle collisions (MVC), often referred to as whiplash trauma and injury, often demonstrate little or no evidence of significant tissue damage. In rare instances, however, serious injury to the anterior neck organ injuries can result from such trauma. The present study describes esophageal injury associated with rear-impact collisions, based on a unique case report, review of the scientific literature and a query in the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) database of the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The Medline search and present case study totaled five cases of rear-impact collision-related serious esophageal injury (laceration or rupture). In the four published cases all patients survived, whereas in the presented case study, the patient died due to mediastinitis and sepsis. The NASS query revealed an additional three cases out of a total of 55,926 investigated crashes. All three cases were associated with fatalities. Although no anatomical or bioengineering studies have presented data on the behavior of the esophagus during rear-impact whiplash loading, sudden tensile and/or compressive forces is the likely explanation of injury, often in combination with a local fracture of a vertebral body. In these 8 cases significant esophageal injury carried a substantial (50%) risk of mortality. Clinicians should be aware of the potential for significant complications in the whiplash trauma-exposed patient who complains of chest pain, mid-thoracic pain, discomfort in the neck and throat, respiratory distress, or hoarseness. For those forensic specialists involved in whiplash cases these study results highlight the need to consider esophageal injuries as a rare but potential consequence of whiplash trauma.