The following proposal gives a taste of what kinds of inquiries we are interested in. We are most interested in papers that challenge old concepts and categories and propose new ones that could potentially drive the development of privacy law in the following decades.

Today, we are witnessing astounding new technologies that efficiently gather, use, and analyze massive amounts of data. These changes have created a set of profound challenges for regulating privacy, as existing regulatory approaches are straining to keep up with rapid technological advances. The regulatory ideas and frameworks over the past few decades have failed to adequately respond to the constantly shifting technological landscape. Policymakers—among many different stakeholders—recognize that a new direction is needed for privacy law, but there remains much to be resolved about what direction it should head. Moreover, deep divides have emerged in how different societies regulate privacy despite the increased need for governments and businesses to share information across borders. These changes present challenges for the core conceptual underpinnings of privacy itself. We thus stand at a crossroads about how to regulate privacy and even how to think about privacy. The road forward will require a deep re-imagining of privacy in both theory and practice.

Theory: On the level of theory, the most crucial demand is to find out what interests are really at stake. What do we as a society really want? (Relatedly, should we even concern ourselves with the privacy regimes of other nations?) The relationship between the robustness of personalized services and their practically necessary encroachment on traditional zones of privacy needs to be addressed. Furthermore, what is the relationship between social and political culture and the architectural design of privacy protection? How do different conceptions of privacy bear on the capacity of participatory democracy? On liberalism generally? On the rule of law? In order to address the practical problems of protecting a particular set of privacy rights, we should be clear on what values we are trying to promote with privacy.

Executive Surveillance: Individuals and policy makers continually grapple with expanding executive encroachment on privacy brought about by new technologies. In the three separate opinions in Jones, the Supreme Court bantered about the constitutional concept of privacy in the realm of government surveillance. Although the opinion of the Court decided the case on narrow grounds, the concurrences suggest at least five justices might entertain a new, more expansive, and more nuanced conception of what constitutes a reasonable expectation of privacy. Should the Court turn in this new direction and overhaul Fourth Amendment jurisprudence? In the modern information society, a wealth of data can now be obtained about the minutia of a person’s life. To what extent should the government have access to this data when maintained by private-sector entities? What limits should the government have in how it may use data after being collected? How should the fusion centers be regulated? How long should data be kept? The laws that regulate electronic surveillance and data use by the government are practically ancient, most being passed in the 1970s and 1980s. Hardly anyone can disagree that the law needs to be updated. But what, exactly, should the law provide? And in what direction will the Court take the Fourth Amendment? Is a more nuanced and contextual approach to the Fourth Amendment desirable or workable?

Private Data Collection: Meanwhile, Google, foremost among the corporate entities suggestively called “Big Data,” continues to amass scraps of information associated with Internet users, in hopes of aggregating the information into a powerfully predictive consumer profile with which it and other companies can selectively target individuals for services and advertising. Although the legal status of this activity in America is unclear, Google has been challenged in Europe for lack of transparency in its privacy policy. What should users expect companies to do with their personal data? Should there be limits on the extent that data is aggregated? Relatedly, do old conceptions of public and private help us properly analyze the social phenomenon of sharing? How does the rise of social media and the extensive self-exposure it brings alter privacy expectations? Should the data people share publicly be scraped together and aggregated and used in ways people were not expecting?

Comparative Perspectives: While American privacy law has varied substantially in different industries, and has often relied extensively on a self-regulatory approach, the Europeans have advanced broad and strong constitutional and statutory privacy rights through the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission. This year, the EC unveiled a new regulation that would expand on the 1995 Data Protection Directive, and will include within it new privacy rights, including the controversial “right to be forgotten.” What can American privacy law learn from these developments in Europe? Is it possible to translate some of the European privacy rights into American law? What can the EU learn from American privacy law? More practically, the significant differences between EU and American privacy approaches impede information flow and create immense challenges in an increasingly global economy. Can these differences be bridged?

[copied from Concurring Opinions]

IP IN MOTION

O P E N I N G U P I P?

University of Leuven, Belgium
September 27-28, 2012

CALL FOR PAPERS

We kindly request that you share this call with your colleagues.
To subscribe to EPIP’s mailing list, please send an email to epip2012@law.kuleuven.be
with the word “Subscribe” in the subject field

The EPIP (European Policy for Intellectual Property) association will hold its 7th Annual Conference on September 27-28, 2012 in Leuven (Belgium). Scholars and practitioners interested in the economic, legal, political and managerial aspects of intellectual property (IP) rights are encouraged to attend the conference with or without paper presentation.

The conference aims to explore and stimulate debate regarding open innovation and creation, and to examine the interaction between open innovation and proprietary IP mechanisms. Is the IP rationale under pressure in view of these changing innovation dynamics? Are IP strategies ‘in motion’ in response to these emerging trends of increased openness?

The plenary sessions will be centered around the major theme of ‘IP in motion’. Leading economists, renown legal scholars, industry representatives and policy makers will take the floor as keynote speakers to share their insights and views on recent developments in the innovation and IP landscape. More in particular, the plenary sessions will address:

Open innovation and IPRs
Open source, open access and IPRs
Open standards and IPRs
Within the EPIP tradition, we are now issuing a call for papers to be presented in the parallel sessions. Submission is open to papers of general interest in the area of IP law and policy. Papers may address topics such as:

Open innovation, new business models and the role of IPRs
Patent pools, patent clearinghouses and open source models
Crowd sourcing and IPRs
Platform technologies and IPRs
Commons and IPRs
Standard setting and IP
Markets for IPRs
IPRs, entrepreneurship and growth
Green innovation and IPRs
Governance and IPRs
Trade secrecy and know how
Mobility of inventors
Networks of inventors
Disambiguating inventors’ names and addresses (methodological papers)
IPRs in science
Economic/financial valuation of IPRs (methodological and practical challenges)
University patenting
…
Papers will be reviewed by the experts of the Scientific Committee. In the parallel sessions feedback on the papers will be provided by keynote speakers, members of the Scientific Committee and senior scholars.

Keynote Speakers

Prof. Kevin BOUDREAU, London Business School, UK
Prof. Dan BURK, University of California, Irvine School of Law, US
Mr. Tony CLAYTON, Patent Office, UK
Prof. Carlos CORREA, University of Buenos Aires, Argentina
Prof. Paul A. DAVID, Oxford University, Department of Economics and Stanford University,
Institute for Economic Policy Research, US
Prof. Koenraad DEBACKERE, Leuven University, Faculty of Business and Economics, Belgium
Prof. Séverine DUSOLLIER, FUNDP, Namur, Belgium
Prof. Carsten FINK, WIPO, Geneva
Prof. Alfonso GAMBARDELLA, Università Commerciale “Luigi Bocconi”
Prof. Bronwyn HALL, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Mathew Heim, Senior Director, Government Affairs, Qualcomm, Brussels
Prof. Reto M. HILTY, Max-Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law, Munich, Germany
Mrs. Ellen ‘t HOEN, Medicines Patent Pool, Geneva
Prof. Timothy SIMCOE, Boston University School of Management, US
Dr. Stuart GRAHAM, Chief economist United States Patent and Trademark Office, US
Dr. Anatole KRATTIGER, WIPO, Geneva (tbc)
Mrs. Kristin NEUMAN, MPEG-LA
Prof. Katherine STRANDBERG, NYU, US
Prof. Kees STUURMAN, Tilburg University, Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society, the Netherlands
Prof. Antony TAUBMAN, Director, Intellectual Property DivisionWorld Trade Organization, Geneva, Switzerland (tbc)
Dr. Nikolaus THUMM, Chief economist European Patent Office, Munich
Dr. Johan Van Helleputte, Senior Vice President Strategic Development IMEC, Belgium (tbc)
Prof. Fred van Lehman, Google

Scientific Committee

Prof. Stephan BECHTOLD, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (German: Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule orETH), Zurich, SwitzerlandProf.
Bruno CASSIMAN, IESE Business School, Barcelona; University of Leuven, Faculty of Business and Economics
Prof. Ian COCKBURN, Boston University, USA
Prof. Dirk CzarnitzkI, University of Leuven, Faculty of Business and Economics, MSI, Belgium
Prof. Paul A. DAVID, Oxford University, Department of Economics, UK; Stanford University, Institute for Economic Policy Research, USA
Prof. Séverine DUSOLLIER, Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix, Centre de Recherche, Information, Droit et Société (CRIDS), Namur, Belgium
Prof. Christoph GRIMPE, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
Prof. Bronwyn H. HALL, University of California at Berkeley, USA; University of Maastricht, the Netherlands
Prof. Dietmar HARHOFF, Ludwig-Maximilians Unversität München, INNO-tec, Germany
Prof. Reto M. HILTY, Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law; Universities of Munich and Zurich, Germany/Switzerland
Prof. Peter LOTZ, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
Prof. Pierre MOHNEN, University of Maastricht, UNU-MERIT, the Netherlands
Prof. Alexander PEUKERT, Goethe Universität Frankfurt, Germany
Prof. Ingrid SCHNEIDER, Universität Hamburg, Forschungsschwerpunkt Biotechnik, Gesellschaft und Umwelt, Germany
Prof. Salvatore TORRISI, University of Bologna, Italy
Prof. Bart VAN LOOY, University of Leuven, Faculty of Business and Economics, MSI, Belgium
Prof. Bruno VAN POTTELSBERGHE, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Solvay Business School, Belgium
Prof. Patrick WAELBROECK, Ecole nationale supérieure des telecommunications, Department of economics and social sciences, Paris, France
Prof. Elisabeth WEBSTER, Melbourne University, Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research; Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia, Australia

Organizing Committee

Prof. Tom DEDEURWAERDERE, Université catholique de Louvain, Centre de Philosophie du Droit, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Prof. Isabelle HUYS, University of Leuven, Faculty of Pharmacy
Drs. Adrian KOVACS, University of Leuven, Faculty of Business and Economics, MSI
Mrs. Linda MEES, University of Leuven, Faculty of Law, Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (CIR)
Prof. Alain STROWEL, Facultés universitaires Saint-Louis, Bruxelles ; Université de Liège, Belgium
Prof. Geertrui VAN OVERWALLE, University of Leuven, Faculty of Law, CIR
Dr. Esther VAN ZIMMEREN, University of Leuven, Faculty of Law, CIR
Prof. Reinhilde VEUGELERS, University of Leuven, Faculty of Business and Economics, Managerial Economics, Strategy and Innovation, MSI

Submission procedure for scientific papers

Full papers as well as extended abstracts may be submitted to http://www.epip.eu/conferences/epip07/submission.php

All proposals must include the following information:

title of the paper
authors’ name and affiliation(s), full address, phone and e-mail address
motivation, research question(s), research methodology
abstract of up to 500 words

Conference fees for academics Early bird conference fee until July 31, 2012 200 €
Student fee, PhD student fee until July 31, 2012 100 €
Normal conference fee after July 31, 2012 250 €

Conference fees for non-academics

Early bird conference fee until July 31, 2012 300 €
Normal conference fee after July 31, 2012 400 €

Time schedule for submission of scientific papers

Deadline for abstract submission May 30, 2012
Notification of paper acceptance July 15, 2012
Full paper submission September 1, 2012

Time table for registration

Opening of registration March 1, 2012
End of early bird registration July 31, 2012
End of registration September 1, 2012

Additional information for authors with accepted papers

In order for your paper to be included in the program, at least one of the authors must have registered to the conference by June 30, 2012. Each participant will only be allowed to present one paper during the conference. Co-authored papers may be presented by any of the participating co-authors.

For more information do not hesitate to contact epip2012@law.kuleuven.be

2012 Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest

http://infojustice.org/public-events/globalcongress2012
December 15-17, 2012
FGV Law School
Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
English | Portuguese

We are pleased to announce the Second Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest. The theme for this year’s Congress will be “Setting the positive agenda in motion.” This note invites applications to attend the Congress, including proposals to chair workshops or deliver a paper or presentation related to the Congress’s theme.

APPLICATION AND COST INFORMATION

The application form is available now at http://infojustice.org/globalcongress2012/registration. Due to generous support from our sponsors, the Congress will cover the registration fees and all on-site costs for all attendees, including lunches and dinner receptions. Limited travel grants to cover accommodation and/or travel to the Congress will be available, with priorities for those from developing countries.

DEADLINES

§ Priority applications for travel assistance and to present or chair a workshop at the Congress will be due by August 1, 2012.

§ Final applications for travel grants, subject to funding availability, as well as applications to present at the Congress, will be due by September 1, 2012.

§ Applicants not seeking travel assistance or presentation opportunities may apply to attend the Congress by November 1, 2012.

BACKGROUND AND EXPLANATION OF THE THEME

The First Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest was convened in 2011 to define a positive agenda for policy reform, build a global network of scholars and advocates to promote the agenda and provide opportunities for the sharing of research and strategies. The nearly 200 inaugural participants from over 30 countries and 6 continents deliberated over three days through in-person meetings and web-based collaboration to produce the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest (http://infojustice.org/washington-declaration) — an action agenda for promoting the public interest in intellectual property and information law reform around the world.

Sixteen months later, we come together to measure our progress and expand the positive agenda. To this end, we invite applications to attend the Congress and contribute to its deliberations identifying forums where policy is being developed, proposing policies or actions that promote public interest goals and principles, and identifying and planning to respond to research and analysis needs.

PRESENTATION OPPORTUNITIES

Because the primary purpose of the Congress is to promote deliberation and action planning, the opportunities for formal presentation will be somewhat limited. We will, however, have spaces for keynote presentations or panel discussions for each session (see below). In addition, as in the inaugural year, the Congress will host small works-in-progress workshops to allow participants to share their own work and solicit feedback from peers.

DRAFT WORKSHOP SESSIONS

Six main tracks will include a half day workshop introduced by a lecture or panel discussion on one or more of the themes noted below. The keynote introduction will be followed by deliberation in which participants will, first, review progress and opportunity in existing or potential policy forums and, second, review the current state of research and identify policy and empirical research needs and resources. Tracks will also have opportunities to draft statements or action plans for adoption at the closing plenary of the Congress or for discussion and online after the Congress ends.

We encourage applicants to identify specific sessions in which they would like to contribute.

Regulating Intellectual Property: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to regulate uses of intellectual property through other legal doctrines that express and safeguard human values, including human rights, consumer protection, competition and privacy laws.

Valuing Openness and the Public Domain: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to ensure that creative and innovative works ultimately become free for all to use as part of the public domain, including through open licensing, open access, open educational resources, open data, open standards, open government, and related open information policies.

Strengthening Limitations and Exceptions as Enabling Tools for Innovation and Expression: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to use limitations and exceptions as positive enabling doctrines to ensure that intellectual property law fulfills its ultimate purpose of promoting essential aspects of the public interest.

Setting Public Interest Priorities for Patent and Research and Development Reform: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to ensure that patent and other research and development policies serve all segments of society, and particularly the most disadvantaged, and accommodate the diverse needs of a complex world with a more diverse structure of incentives for innovation.

Supporting Cultural Creativity: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to maximize opportunities for creativity while increasing access to creative works and helping to end disputes over practices like non-commercial file-sharing.

Checking Enforcement Excesses: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to ensure that intellectual property enforcement policies and practices respect the human rights principle of proportionality and are not used as a diversion from the difficult task of tailoring intellectual property norms to their social contexts.

Implementing Development Agendas: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to fully integrate the development dimension into intellectual property policy and norm-setting at all levels of international and national intellectual policy making.

Targeted Research: Given the spectrum of issues described above, what are the key research needs? Given academic incentive structures, what kinds of research fall through the cracks? Given the funding crisis in this field, how can we meet research needs on the cheap? Given the international scope of many policy issues, how can we work collaboratively and comparatively? Given the Internet, how can we develop and leverage new software tools for data collection?

In addition to the above sessions, we invite presentations on other topics relevant to the positive agenda the Washington Declaration promotes, including:

§ the role of mobilisation and activism.

§ collaboration between ISPs and governments in enforcement

§ the ecology of access to educational materials

§ designing copyright from scratch

§ updates and lessons from specific forms, e.g. WIPO, national legislatures, trade negotiations, etc.

The application form is available now at http://infojustice.org/globalcongress2012/registration. Please forward this invitation to interested lists and individuals. For more information or questions, you may contactglobalcongress2012@gmail.com.

GLOBAL CONGRESS PLANNING COMMITTEE:

§ Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade – CTS | FGV DIREITO RIO, 2012 Chair

§ American Assembly, Columbia University, New York

§ International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Geneva

§ Centre for Internet and Society, India

§ Open African Innovation Research and Training (Open AIR) initiative

§ Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, American University, Wash. D.C.

May 18-19, 2012
Bucerius Law School
Hamburg, Germany

The Bucerius Law School is pleased to invite you to the inaugural academic conference of its Center for Transnational IP, Media and Technology Law and Policy. The Center’s mission is to contribute to scholarship in the critical fields of Intellectual Property and Knowledge Governance from a global perspective.

The academic conference is intended to identify emerging initiatives, ideas and research in Intellectual Property and related fields. The focus is on new approaches to information access, reuse and collective use and on means to incentivize innovation, while dealing with the tension between access and incentives in a balanced manner.

This conference brings together some of the world’s best-known thinkers in the field of Intellectual Property and Knowledge Governance. They will present their work and discuss their thoughts on emerging directions and solutions. The ideas shared will likely inform tomorrow’s legislation.

We anticipate a stimulating exchange of ideas between speakers and audience, with ample opportunity for discussion.

Keynote speakers
•Amelia Andersdotter (Member of the European Parliament)
•Professor Graeme Dinwoodie (University of Oxford)
•Professor Dr. Reto M. Hilty (Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law; University of Zurich)
•Roger Kampf (World Trade Organization)
•Professor Jerome H. Reichman (Duke University)

Additional features
•Expanded coverage of ACTA and the European Parliament’s approach
•Young scholars’ panel (selected young scholars will present their work)
•Networking breaks, dinner reception and post conference sightseeing trip

We hope you will also enjoy the beauty and numerous attractions that are offered by Hamburg in May. Please check out our Culture and Sightseeing options. Should you need assistance, please contact Natja Rühl.

Website: http://ipcenter.law-school.de/conference/description.html

Auditorium 101, 1st floor, Hatter Student Building
University of Haifa – Faculty of Law

Academic Organizers:
Dr. Khalid Ghanayim, Dr. Tal Zarsky, Haifa University, Faculty of Law

New digital technologies are generating a rich discourse of ideas and content, which is easily and mostly freely available to all. Technology enables these beneficial dynamics by reducing the costs of interactions and data distribution. Yet technology also reduced the costs of antisocial and destructive activity. It might lead to breaches of privacy, slanderous exchanges and even promote violence and suppression of weaker groups. Therefore, these new trends of information flow lead to a variety of legal questions and policy challenges.

Any legal and policy discussion regarding digital content and its potential detriments quickly gravitates towards digital intermediaries. These powerful distribution platforms stand at a crucial juncture in the overall information flow. At this point, they can control and even shape the public discourse. Given their position of power, they naturally generate questions regarding their liability for the harms the information they convey cause, as well as other policy concerns. Should intermediaries be held liable for harms caused by the information conveyed and speech exercised within their virtual realm? Should they be required to structure their policies and interfaces in a specific manner? Should one set of rules pertain to all intermediaries, or is a more context-specific policy strategy called for?

The symposium brings together leading legal experts from around the world. They are joined by legal practitioners and members of the relevant industries. The discussion will focus on the legal questions and policy concerns related to intermediary liability in this new digital environment. In doing so, this event will address the important rights and interests at stake – free speech, technological development and innovation as well as privacy and personal autonomy rights. It will examine the novel contexts of cyberlaw and telecommunications policy, while acknowledging existing doctrines of tort law, and related topics (such as copyright). The discussion will examine general intermediaries, as well as specific intermediaries which provide unique services (search engines, social networks, dating websites and others). The symposium will also examine the technological and social backgrounds that for these legal issues.

Website: http://weblaw.haifa.ac.il/en/Events/INTERMEDIARY/Pages/default.aspx

Patent Institutions Summit:

Bringing Together the PTO, Federal Circuit, District Courts and the ITC

Monday, May 21, 2012

8:20 am – 5:30 pm

Stanford University

Paul Brest Hall, Munger Graduate Residences (map)

Register Online or visit the Conference Page for more information: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/13048.htm

BCLT Sponsors are eligible for a special discounted registration rate. Contact Louise Lee at llee@law.berkeley.edu for more information.

Now that the America Invents Act (AIA) has been signed into law, many of the most promising opportunities for continued progress in improving the patent system lie in PTO initiatives and improvements in dispute resolution. Under Director Kappos’s leadership, the Patent Office has instituted a wide range of administrative reforms and data-driven initiatives aimed at better aligning the patent system. The Federal Circuit has taken a much more active role in addressing perceived weaknesses in patent jurisprudence. The district courts – led by the Northern District of California – have made substantial strides in improving patent dispute resolution. And the ITC has emerged as a major player in patent enforcement. The Patent Institutions Summit brings together key officials from the principal patent institutions to discuss and exchange ideas on the next era of patent system evolution. With significant patent reform unlikely for the foreseeable future, the PTO, Federal Circuit, district courts, and ITC will play critical, front-line roles in improving the patent system. Coordinating their activities and measuring/evaluating their progress will be essential to the next phase of progress.

Join us for this unique event featuring patent system leaders from government, the bench, industry and academia.

Confirmed Speakers Include:

U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

Hon. David J. Kappos
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property
and Director of the USPTO

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Hon. Katherine O’ Malley
Circuit Judge

U.S. District Courts

Hon. Jeremy Fogel
Director, Federal Judicial Center and U.S. District Judge

Hon. Lucy H. Koh
U.S. District Court Judge (N.D. Cal)

Hon. Ronald M. Whyte
U.S. District Judge (N.D. Cal)

U.S. International Trade Commission

Hon. Shara Aranoff
Commissioner

Hon. Charles E. Bullock
Chief ALJ

Steve Carlson
Fish & Richardson

Prof. John Duffy
University of Virginia School of Law

Michelle Lee
Google

Prof. Mark Lemley
Stanford Law School

Chip Lutton
former Chief Patent Counsel (2001-2011), Apple

Prof. Peter Menell
BCLT and Berkeley Law, Stanford Law School (visiting 2011-12)

Prof. Robert Merges
BCLT and Berkeley Law

Matthew Powers
Tensegrity Law Group

Arti Rai
Duke University School of Law

Edward Reines
Weil, Gotshal & Manges

Stefani Shanberg
Wilson, Sonisini, Goodrich & Rosati

Laura Sorto
Genentech

Lee Van Pelt
Van Pelt, Yi & James, LLP

Mallun Yen
RPX Corporation

Hon. Ronald Whyte
United States Court of the Northern District of California

This conference is free and open to the public. Registration is open until the event begins, but only attendees registered by Wednesday, May 2, 2012 will receive lunch and a name tag.

On September 16, 2011, President Obama signed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), the most significant change to the US Patent system since the Patent Act of 1952. The result of years of efforts to revise and reform the laws governing patent practice in the US, many consider the AIA to be a success. However, the AIA is not without its critics. Six months into the AIA’s first year, “Patent Success or Failure?” will bring together government officials, judges, lawyers, and academics to consider the effects of the legislation on the patent landscape.

Attorneys: This transitional CLE program has been approved in accordance with the requirements of the New York Continuing Legal Education Board for a maximum of five hours professional practice credit. This program has been approved by the Board on Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 5.4 hours total CLE credit.

PROGRAM

Opening Keynote (10:00 AM – 10:30 AM)
Judge Paul Michel, Former Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Panel 1: AIA Implementation (10:30 AM – 12:00 PM)
The AIA sets out a protracted timeline for implementing its many provisions, with the last of these provisions taking effect September 16, 2019. This session will focus on major questions of implementation.

Marian Underweiser, Counsel, IBM Corporation (moderator)
Arti Rai, Elvin R. Latty Professor of Law, Duke Law
Mark Nikolsky, Partner, McCarter & English
Robert Sterne, Director, Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

Lunch (12:00 PM – 1:30 PM)
Keynote Speaker: David Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office

Panel 2: AIA and Patent Reform (1:30 AM – 3:00 PM)
The AIA has the potential to alter the patent landscape significantly. Given the lengthy timeline for fully implementing the AIA, it may be years before we feel the full effects of the legislation. This session will examine the ways in which the AIA has already changed patent law, and look forward to the future effects of the legislation.

Jason M. Schultz, Director, Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic; Assistant Clinical Professor of Law, Berkley Law School (moderator)
Joe Matal, General Counsel, Senate Judiciary Committee
Dan Ravicher, Lecturer in Law, Cardozo Law; Executive Director, Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT)
Steven Halpern, Associate, McCarter & English

Panel 3: Patent Reform and Innovation Across Industries (3:30 PM – 5:00 PM)
Much of the criticism of our patent system can be traced to the feeling that the system does not work equally for all stakeholders, and the AIA is no exception to this. This session will offer a comparative look at the AIA across industries, such as software and biotechnology.

Dennis Crouch, Assistant Professor, University of Missouri School of Law, and the Patently-O blog (moderator)
Colleen Chien, Assistant Professor, Santa Clara Law
Andrea Kamage, Senior Patent Counsel, Law Department, Johnson & Johnson
Suzanne Michel, Senior Patent Counsel, Google
Julie Samuels, Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation

Closing Keynote (5:00 PM – 5:30 PM)
Judge Randall Rader, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

5/4/2012
9:00 am – 6:30 pm

Technology has in some ways made it easier to hide and shape one’s identity. (“On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.”) But in other ways, the information age has made anonymity, particularly the anonymity of the crowd, much more difficult to attain. The law has only begun to grapple with these technologies of anonymity and identity. There are important interests at stake on both sides. Control over identity is an important aspect of personal privacy, and of making it possible for people to speak and act freely.

But identification is necessary for accountability, and identity information has important social uses, for example, for public health or social science research. Recognizing the opposing interests is only a start; the hard questions lie in framing the ways in which to balance these interests. And whatever balance might have existed under earlier technologies must be re-crafted as those technologies evolve.

These are questions that will require the expertise of both technologists and lawyers. The technology constrains and influences the legal possibilities. The architecture of the Internet affects the extent to which anonymous communication is possible. State-of-the-art data mining techniques affect the extent to which databases can be anonymized. At the same time, there are fundamental values questions about the relationship between citizens and the state, between individual and social utility, among others, that are key components of the debate.

This conference brings together participants from a variety of disciplines, across computer science and law, to analyze questions of anonymity and identity. The focus is on three areas in particular: anonymity and online speech, government access to identity information, and identifiability in databases. In all three areas, the goal is to survey the existing technological and legal landscape, to develop principles for the future, and to formulate next steps, for both researchers and policy makers.

Conference organized by Professor Felix Wu, Cardozo School of Law

CLE credits will be available for attendees and participants. This conference is free and open to the public, but RSVP to ipprogram@yu.edu is required.

Anonymity and Identity in the Information Age

FRIDAY, MAY 4, 2012
Jacob Burns Moot Court Room

9 – 10 a.m. Breakfast

10 – 10:15 a.m. Welcome

10:15 a.m. – Noon
PANEL ONE: Anonymity, Identity and Online Speech

This panel will address the relationships among identifiability, the construction of identity, and speech on the Internet. How do different conditions of relative anonymity or other choices about the design of online spaces affect the quality of online speech? What should be the legal standard under which private litigants have access to identity information? Should the law try to encourage or discourage particular identity models?

JUDITH DONATH, Faculty Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University

A. MICHAEL FROOMKIN, Laurie Silvers and Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Miami

HELEN NORTON, Associate Professor of Law, University of Colorado

JEFF JARVIS, Professor & Director of the Tow-Knight Center for Entrepreneurial Journalism, City University of New York

MODERATOR: JAMES GRIMMELMANN, Associate Professor of Law, New York Law School

Noon – 1:30 p.m. Lunch

1:30 – 3:15 p.m.
PANEL TWO: Government Access to Identity Information

This panel will address the standards by which the government should have access to identity information. Given the current architecture of the Internet, in what ways can the government acquire identity information, and in what ways can individuals try to hide their identities? Does current law provide sufficient protection for the First Amendment interests in anonymous speech? How should the Fourth Amendment treat different types of identity information?

STEVEN BELLOVIN, Professor of Computer Science, Columbia University

ADEN FINE, Senior Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union

JASON WEINSTEIN, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

ADAM CANDEUB, Professor of Law, Michigan State University

MODERATOR: KATHERINE STRANDBURG, Professor of Law, New York University

3:30 – 5:15 p.m.
PANEL THREE: Identifiability and Databases

This panel will address the problem of control over identity information in databases. Information about individuals is increasingly being collected and aggregated, from medical records and court records to consumer transaction databases. To what extent can such information be released in an “anonymized” form that sufficiently protects individual privacy and also makes socially beneficial uses of the data possible? How can we balance the interest in beneficial uses of information against the potential for harm in releasing information that might be linked to identity?

VITALY SHMATIKOV, Associate Professor of Computer Science, University of Texas at Austin

BRADLEY MALIN, Associate Professor of Biomedical Informatics & Computer Science, Vanderbilt University

PETER P. SWIRE, C. William O’Neill Professor in Law and Judicial Administration, Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University

BARBARA EVANS, Professor of Law, University of Houston

HARLAN YU, Center for Information Technology Policy, Princeton University

MODERATOR: FELIX WU, Assistant Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

5:30 – 6:30 p.m.
KEYNOTE
THE HONORABLE ALEX KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

2012 Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest

http://infojustice.org/public-events/globalcongress2012

December 15-17, 2012
FGV Law School
Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
English | Portuguese

Printable Call for Participation

We are pleased to announce the Second Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest. The theme for this year’s Congress will be “Setting the positive agenda in motion.” This note invites applications to attend the Congress, including proposals to chair workshops or deliver a paper or presentation related to the Congress’s theme.

APPLICATION AND COST INFORMATION

The application form is available now at http://infojustice.org/globalcongress2012/registration. Due to generous support from our sponsors, the Congress will cover the registration fees and all on-site costs for all attendees, including lunches and dinner receptions. Limited travel grants to cover accommodation and/or travel to the Congress will be available, with priorities for those from developing countries.

DEADLINES

§ Priority applications for travel assistance and to present or chair a workshop at the Congress will be due by August 1, 2012.

§ Final applications for travel grants, subject to funding availability, as well as applications to present at the Congress, will be due by September 1, 2012.

§ Applicants not seeking travel assistance or presentation opportunities may apply to attend the Congress by November 1, 2012.

BACKGROUND AND EXPLANATION OF THE THEME

The First Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest was convened in 2011 to define a positive agenda for policy reform, build a global network of scholars and advocates to promote the agenda and provide opportunities for the sharing of research and strategies. The nearly 200 inaugural participants from over 30 countries and 6 continents deliberated over three days through in-person meetings and web-based collaboration to produce the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest (http://infojustice.org/washington-declaration) — an action agenda for promoting the public interest in intellectual property and information law reform around the world.

Sixteen months later, we come together to measure our progress and expand the positive agenda. To this end, we invite applications to attend the Congress and contribute to its deliberations identifying forums where policy is being developed, proposing policies or actions that promote public interest goals and principles, and identifying and planning to respond to research and analysis needs.

PRESENTATION OPPORTUNITIES

Because the primary purpose of the Congress is to promote deliberation and action planning, the opportunities for formal presentation will be somewhat limited. We will, however, have spaces for keynote presentations or panel discussions for each session (see below). In addition, as in the inaugural year, the Congress will host small works-in-progress workshops to allow participants to share their own work and solicit feedback from peers.

DRAFT WORKSHOP SESSIONS

Six main tracks will include a half day workshop introduced by a lecture or panel discussion on one or more of the themes noted below. The keynote introduction will be followed by deliberation in which participants will, first, review progress and opportunity in existing or potential policy forums and, second, review the current state of research and identify policy and empirical research needs and resources. Tracks will also have opportunities to draft statements or action plans for adoption at the closing plenary of the Congress or for discussion and online after the Congress ends.

We encourage applicants to identify specific sessions in which they would like to contribute.

Regulating Intellectual Property: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to regulate uses of intellectual property through other legal doctrines that express and safeguard human values, including human rights, consumer protection, competition and privacy laws.

Valuing Openness and the Public Domain: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to ensure that creative and innovative works ultimately become free for all to use as part of the public domain, including through open licensing, open access, open educational resources, open data, open standards, open government, and related open information policies.

Strengthening Limitations and Exceptions as Enabling Tools for Innovation and Expression: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to use limitations and exceptions as positive enabling doctrines to ensure that intellectual property law fulfills its ultimate purpose of promoting essential aspects of the public interest.

Setting Public Interest Priorities for Patent and Research and Development Reform: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to ensure that patent and other research and development policies serve all segments of society, and particularly the most disadvantaged, and accommodate the diverse needs of a complex world with a more diverse structure of incentives for innovation.

Supporting Cultural Creativity: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to maximize opportunities for creativity while increasing access to creative works and helping to end disputes over practices like non-commercial file-sharing.

Checking Enforcement Excesses: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to ensure that intellectual property enforcement policies and practices respect the human rights principle of proportionality and are not used as a diversion from the difficult task of tailoring intellectual property norms to their social contexts.

Implementing Development Agendas: This session will survey recent developments and proposals to fully integrate the development dimension into intellectual property policy and norm-setting at all levels of international and national intellectual policy making.

Targeted Research: Given the spectrum of issues described above, what are the key research needs? Given academic incentive structures, what kinds of research fall through the cracks? Given the funding crisis in this field, how can we meet research needs on the cheap? Given the international scope of many policy issues, how can we work collaboratively and comparatively? Given the Internet, how can we develop and leverage new software tools for data collection?

In addition to the above sessions, we invite presentations on other topics relevant to the positive agenda the Washington Declaration promotes, including:

§ the role of mobilisation and activism.

§ collaboration between ISPs and governments in enforcement

§ the ecology of access to educational materials

§ designing copyright from scratch

§ updates and lessons from specific forms, e.g. WIPO, national legislatures, trade negotiations, etc.

The application form is available now at http://infojustice.org/globalcongress2012/registration. Please forward this invitation to interested lists and individuals. For more information or questions, you may contactglobalcongress2012@gmail.com.

GLOBAL CONGRESS PLANNING COMMITTEE:

§ Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade – CTS | FGV DIREITO RIO, 2012 Chair

§ American Assembly, Columbia University, New York

§ International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Geneva

§ Centre for Internet and Society, India

§ Open African Innovation Research and Training (Open AIR) initiative

§ Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, American University, Wash. D.C.