Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series最新文献

{"title":"Analysis of Knockoff Culture and the need for IP protection in the Fashion Industry in India","authors":"Ena Kapur","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3875108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3875108","url":null,"abstract":"The present paper analyzes the role of intellectual property protection vis-à-vis the fashion industry. The Piracy Paradox coined by law professors Kal Raustiala and Christopher Sprigman in the United States has led to imitation becoming an inescapable reality for designers all around the world on the astonishing pretext that is “imitation sparks innovation.” Presenting a critique of the Paradox in the Indian scenario in Part 1 of the paper, the author stresses upon the need for securing proper laws to protect the heart of the fashion industry, that is original artistic expressions. In Part 2 of the paper, whilst examining judicial decisions in India, the author argues that the present laws are riddled with loopholes that have resulted in a proliferation of cheap knock-offs that not only hamper the creative process of a brand, but negatively impact its exclusive reputation as well as its revenue. The infamous idea presented by the Piracy Paradox coupled with a lacunae in the laws have cost not only big fashion brands and designers but also disrupted the emergence of businesses in the nascent stages. To conclude, solutions have been proposed to dismantle the notion propounded by the Piracy Paradox and strengthen the laws in place to ensure fair and just competition in the economy.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130644231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Law and Economics of Markets with Digital Platforms","authors":"K. Basu, Aviv Caspi, R. Hockett","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3566590","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3566590","url":null,"abstract":"The arrival of the digital platform for buying and selling goods is altering the nature of markets by creating enormous economies of scale and enabling firms to reach purchasers far and wide. Further, digital platforms, especially when they are themselves profit-making firms, give rise to new regulatory challenges. This paper surveys research on the economics of digital platforms and their challenges to law and economics. Alongside, it builds simple models to characterize the nature of equilibria in oligopolistic and competitive markets that are mediated by private digital platforms. The paper closes with a discussion of regulatory options.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124241864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"White Paper: A National Investment Authority","authors":"R. Hockett, S. Omarova","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3125533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3125533","url":null,"abstract":"The contemporary American economy presents a troubling paradox. On the one hand, capital and yield-hungry investors are sufficiently plentiful in the financial system to generate recurrent and devastating asset price bubbles and busts. On the other hand, capital and “patient” investors are so scarce in the nonfinancial and infrastructure sectors that the U.S. has steadily fallen behind its competitors in cutting-edge industries and high quality infrastructure. The explanation for this paradox is not hard to find. Unlike during the nation’s most dynamic and prosperous periods in the past, there is at present no public instrumentality tasked with devising and implementing any ongoing national development strategy, or with directing the capital needed to implement it. \u0000No private actor or group of such actors is up to this task. Individual time horizons are too short, and individual capacity to bear long-term risks and capture fair shares of public goods too miniscule, to render such efforts individually rational. Against such a backdrop, it is reasonable for investors to speculate upon price movements in secondary markets rather than invest patiently in primary markets – hence to fuel asset price bubbles and busts rather than real growth. The nation’s economy is accordingly caught in a classic collective action problem – a situation in which multiple acts of individual rationality aggregate into a collectively irrational outcome. Only informed exercises of collective agency can address such problems. \u0000This White Paper proposes a form that such agency should take. It calls for a new National Investment Authority (NIA), operationally situated between the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, for the specific purpose of mobilizing private capital in pursuit of long-term investments in both vital infrastructure and the real economy. The NIA reintroduces in modern guise the Hamiltonian national development program of the late 18th century and the Hoover/Roosevelt-era Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) of the mid-20th century. Like those earlier programs, it combines the public and private sectors in partnership. Also like those earlier programs, it reverses the ill-fated latter-day “P3” model of “public capital, private management” in favor of the historically more successful model of “public management, mixed public-and-private capital.” \u0000The Paper first lays out the key theoretical and practical justifications for establishing an NIA. It then unpacks the proposal in detail by addressing the specific legal, administrative, and operational choices that will have to be made in connection with its implementation. We lay out and assess the full range of plausible options in connection with each such choice, then conclude and look forward.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125352066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"MDL v. Trump","authors":"Andrew D. Bradt, Z. Clopton","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3014825","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3014825","url":null,"abstract":"Litigation against the Trump Administration has proliferated rapidly since the inauguration. As cases challenging executive actions, such as the “travel ban,” multiply in federal courts around the country, an important procedural question has so far not been considered — Should these sets of cases be consolidated in a single court under the Multidistrict Litigation Act? Multidistrict litigation, or MDL, has become one of the most prominent parts of federal litigation and offers substantial benefits by coordinating litigation pending in geographically dispersed federal courts. Arguably, those benefits would also accrue if “public law” cases were given MDL treatment. There also are some underappreciated strategic reasons why both plaintiffs and the government might want to invoke the MDL process in these cases — and we suspect that, sooner rather than later, one of these parties might give MDL a try. \u0000In this Essay, we argue that although the MDL statute would allow for consolidation of these public law cases, there are prudential reasons why the judges in charge of MDL should stay their hands. In our view, these cases rarely achieve the efficiencies of most MDLs, and there is value to these cases undergoing scrutiny in multiple trial and appellate courts before they percolate upward to Supreme Court review. Moreover, consolidation of these cases would raise the political profile of the MDL process and thus might politicize the MDL itself as well as the selection of its judges. This politicization could undermine MDL’s primary role in mass tort litigation — and, indeed, it risks harming the national tort system more generally.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126844026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Introduction. The EUBS Without States?","authors":"M. Faioli","doi":"10.7384/87119","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7384/87119","url":null,"abstract":"The application of the EUBS (i.e the European Unemployment Benefit Scheme) might be source of legal and operational problems at domestic level. It is important to understand the EU legal sources and the differences between the EUBS forms, and their articulation with the National Unemployment Benefit Scheme (NUBS). Therefore at the core of the special issue of “Economia & Lavoro” (1/2017) there is a short list of queries. This allowed to focus on realities and face the possible legal clash of the EUBS with the NUBS.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127743971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Blockchain, contratti e lavoro. La ri-rivoluzione del digitale nel mondo produttivo e nella PA (Blockchain, Contracts and Labor. Digital Re-Revolution for Private Sectors and State Administration)","authors":"M. Faioli","doi":"10.7384/84408","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7384/84408","url":null,"abstract":"Italian Abstract: Il saggio approfondisce, con un approccio interdisciplinare, i temi giuridici che la tecnologia blockchain determinera nella publica amministrazione. In particolare, sono esaminati i profili degli smart contracts, per cio che attiene al diritto dei contratti, e i profili di riorganizzazione giuslavoristica, con un focus sulla contrattazione collettiva decentrata, in ragione delle trasformazioni aziendali. Una indagine ampia sulla tecnologia e sviluppata nella parte iniziale del saggio.English Abstract: This essay is aimed at describing the main items related to a interdisciplinary research on blockchain technology. Blockchain solves an elusive networking problem by allowing trust-less transactions. Values, goods, rights can be transacted without central institutions. Such transactions will be verified, monitored and enforced by means of the blockchain technology. The legal issues, the related workplace disruption and the gig-economy impact are analyzed in order to better understand the blockchain effects in the near future.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121771337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Managing Regulatory Arbitrage: An Alternative to Harmonization","authors":"Annelise Riles","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2334301","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2334301","url":null,"abstract":"This policy-oriented article argues for deploying conflict of laws doctrines as a tool of coordination in international financial governance.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128205476","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Tale of Two Cities: From Davids Holdings to Metcash","authors":"George A. Hay, E. Murdoch","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2220430","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2220430","url":null,"abstract":"In 1994, the Full Federal Court upheld the decision of the trial judge to prevent the hostile acquisition of a majority shareholding in QIW Retailers Ltd (QIW) by Davids Holdings (Davids), on the grounds that, as a result of the proposed merger, the merged company would be in a position to dominate a market defined as the supply of grocery products by independent wholesalers to independent retailers in Queensland and northern New South Wales. The basic claim of the Applicants was that, as a result of the merger, Davids would be the only supplier of groceries to independent retailers in the geographic market and would, as a result, be in a position to exercise monopoly power. While the independent retailers faced significant competition in the downstream (retail) business from the integrated retail chains (such as Coles and Woolworths), the Court found that such competition would not be sufficient to prevent the exercise of monopoly power in the upstream (wholesale) business. In 2011, the Full Federal Court upheld the decision of the trial judge not to prevent the acquisition by Metcash Trading Limited (Metcash) of Interfrank Group Holdings Pty Limited (Franklins). The acquisition had been opposed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) on the grounds that it would leave Metcash as (effectively) the only wholesale supplier of packaged groceries to independent retailers in New South Wales. The Court rejected the Commission’s claim, finding that the merged firm would not be able to exercise market power due to the constraining presence downstream of the integrated retail chains (primarily Coles and Woolworths).So we have two cases with, on the surface at least, very similar facts. Yet the outcomes in the two cases were 180 degrees apart. What explains the different outcomes? In this article, we try to identify a critical analytical difference in the way that the cases were presented to the Court and will suggest that this difference may have had a significant influence on the outcomes.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130964630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Book Review: Socio-Economic Rights: Adjudication Under a Transformative Constitution","authors":"Elizabeth Brundige, Sital Kalantry","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2667008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2667008","url":null,"abstract":"Project Muse.Book Review of Socio-Economic Rights: Adjudication Under a Transformative Constitution.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"208 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134332068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Collateral Knowledge: Legal Reasoning in the Global Financial Markets","authors":"Annelise Riles","doi":"10.5860/choice.49-0995","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-0995","url":null,"abstract":"Who are the agents of financial regulation? Is good (or bad) financial governance merely the work of legislators and regulators? Here Annelise Riles argues that financial governance is made not just through top-down laws and policies but also through the daily use of mundane legal techniques such as collateral by a variety of secondary agents, from legal technicians and retail investors to financiers and academics and even computerized trading programs. Drawing upon her ten years of ethnographic fieldwork in the Japanese derivatives market, Riles explores the uses of collateral in the financial markets as a regulatory device for stabilizing market transactions. How collateral operates, Riles suggests, is paradigmatic of a class of low-profile, mundane, but indispensable activities and practices that are all too often ignored as we think about how markets should work and be governed. Riles seeks to democratize our understanding of legal techniques, and demonstrate how these day-to-day private actions can be reformed to produce more effective forms of market regulation.","PeriodicalId":205967,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115378982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}