Stanford law & policy review最新文献_第3页

Calling a Truce in the Culture Wars: From Enron to the CIA 文化战争停战:从安然到中央情报局

Stanford law & policy review Pub Date : 2005-08-25 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.790804

Craig S. Lerner

{"title":"Calling a Truce in the Culture Wars: From Enron to the CIA","authors":"Craig S. Lerner","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.790804","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.790804","url":null,"abstract":"This Article compares and evaluates recent Congressional efforts to improve institutional \"cultures\" in the private and public sectors. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was designed to upgrade corporate culture by patching up the \"walls\" that separate corporate management from boards of directors, accountants, lawyers, and financial analysts. The Intelligence Reform Act of 2005 took a different tack, hammering away at walls that supposedly segmented the intelligence community. The logic was that the market failed because people did not observe sufficient formalities in their dealings with one another, while the intelligence community failed precisely because people kept their distance from one another and declined to share information. The way to improve their respective cultures, Congress determined, was to build up walls in the one case and to tear them down in the other.This Article expresses some skepticism, however, about these solutions. Building walls in the private sector increases transaction costs, which may outweigh any benefits in detecting fraud. With respect to the intelligence community, compartmentalization of information diminishes risks associated with double agents; redundancy of tasks may provide a safety margin; and segmentation of government agencies may guard against civil liberties violations as well as provide additional spurs to action. Furthermore, thriving firms in the private sector forge successful, though likely idiosyncratic, cultures designed to exploit business opportunities. Because the market is largely self-correcting, regulatory efforts to dictate a particular reorganization or cultural shift are probably unnecessary and possibly harmful. By contrast, the CIA, FBI, NSA, and all other government agencies operate without fear of bankruptcy, which is to say in the absence of penalties for deficient cultures (or rewards for successful ones). Nonetheless, efforts to re-structure government bureaucracies, nominally to re-make their cultures, should be regarded with caution. First, such efforts will almost inevitably be undertaken by political actors, whose motivations are at a minimum suspect. Second, even assuming the best of intentions and the utmost of human wisdom, central planners cannot forecast the untold costs and benefits to a major governmental reorganization. The Intelligence Reform Act's overhaul of the intelligence community will have certain and substantial costs in the short-term, and very uncertain, if any, benefits in the long term.","PeriodicalId":82802,"journal":{"name":"Stanford law & policy review","volume":"17 1","pages":"277"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2005-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67828883","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}

引用次数: 8

A New Progressivism 新进步主义

Stanford law & policy review Pub Date : 2005-05-19 DOI: 10.4324/9780203487440

C. Sunstein

引用次数: 54

What's the use? Law and authority in patenting human genetic material. 有什么用?人类遗传物质专利的法律和权威。

Stanford law & policy review Pub Date : 2003-06-26 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.409220

J. Kahn

{"title":"What's the use? Law and authority in patenting human genetic material.","authors":"J. Kahn","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.409220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.409220","url":null,"abstract":"Most analyses of the relationship between intellectual property and genetics have focused on important but relatively discrete policy debates about when or whether genetic information should be patented. This article aims to delve beneath the surface of such debates to unearth and interrogate unarticulated themes and assumptions that implicitly reconstruct existing understandings of personhood, citizenship, and authority in terms of genetic discourses. Where the domains of science and the market intersect in patent law, genetic identity and property intertwine, each informing and to a degree becoming a function of the other. As experts in the natural and social sciences construct human identity at the molecular level, venture capital is making deals with these same professionals to manage and transform that identity into marketable products subject to patent rights. Genes are thus becoming sources both of identity and of property, concepts basic to historical constructions of American citizenship Contemporary discourses of genetics and rights may be currently reshaping understandings of citizenship to the extent that the legal identity of the individual is implicated in and constructed through a relationship to her genetic material. The first step toward understanding and analyzing the nature of this relationship is to explore how genetic material itself is identified and defined within the domain of legal discourse. Intellectual property law provides a primary site for this exploration because, more than most other areas of the law, it deals explicitly with defining the nature and legal status of human genetic material. This article explores the patenting of human genetic material as a site where science, the market, and law \"situate the self\" in the genome in a manner that simultaneously renders it a subject of commerce. As an entry point to this still large area of study, I choose the relatively circumscribed arena presented by the rather heated debates that emerged in 1999 and 2000 around the proposed revisions to the \"Utility Examination Guidelines\" used by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) in evaluating the validity of patent applications. In examining the debates before the PTO, I aim to show how certain claims, supported by particular models of authoritative knowledge, gain recognition from and access to the power of the American legal and regulatory system while others are marginalized and denied. I argue that the PTO, functioning in a quasi-judicial manner, constructs distinctions between issues of policy and administration as a means to circumscribe the debates over patentability of human genetic material. The boundaries it draws, enables the PTO to bracket and dismiss concerns couched dignitary and religious discourses while recognizing and crediting the more technical arguments of scientific and economic experts.","PeriodicalId":82802,"journal":{"name":"Stanford law & policy review","volume":"46 1","pages":"417-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2003-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79434501","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}

引用次数: 4

What's the use? Law and authority in patenting human genetic material. 有什么用?人类遗传物质专利的法律和权威。

Stanford law & policy review Pub Date : 2003-01-01

Jonathan Kahn

引用次数: 0

Ethical issues at the end of life. 生命末期的伦理问题。

Stanford law & policy review Pub Date : 1998-01-01

E W D Young

引用次数: 0

Children as research subjects: a proposal to revise the current federal regulations using a moral framework. 儿童作为研究对象:用道德框架修改现行联邦法规的建议。

Stanford law & policy review Pub Date : 1997-01-01

L F Ross