Intellectual Property Law Section Association of American Law Schools

The Intellectual Property Law Section of the Association of American Law Schools was organized to facilitate the study of intellectual property in American law schools and to provide a forum for law faculty members engaged in the teaching of intellectual property and related subjects to exchange ideas.

Scholarship

[the entries below are obtained via the electronic version of the Current Index to Legal Periodicals; beginning with February 2007, the dates indicated correspond to the publication date of the CILP]

June 2009

Bitton, Miriam. Exploring European Union copyright policy through the lens of the database directive. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1411-1470 (2008).
Blair-Stanek, Andrew. Increased market power as a new secondary consideration in patent law. 58 Am. U. L. Rev. 707-746 (2009).
Bradford, Laura R. Emotion, dilution, and the trademark consumer. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1227-1298 (2008).
Creighton, Susan A. and Scott A. Sher. Resolving patent disputes through merger: a comparison of three potential approaches. 75 Antitrust L.J. 657-690 (2009).
Eiland, Murry Lee. The institutional role in arbitrating patent disputes. 9 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 283-323 (2009).
Field, Ted L. Improving the Federal Circuit’s approach to choice of law for procedural matters in patent cases. 16 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 643-699 (2009).
Frazer, Brad. Open source is not public domain: evolving licensing philosophies. 45 Idaho L. Rev. 349-375 (2009).
Ginsburg, Jane C. The author’s place in the future of copyright. 45 Willamette L. Rev. 381-394 (2009).
The Law, Culture, and Economics of Fashion. Article by C. Scott Hemphill and Jeannie Suk; response by Kal Raustiala and Christopher Sprigman; reply by C. Scott Hemphill and Jeannie Suk. 61 Stan. L. Rev. 1147-1232 (2009).
Jaynes, Andrew. Why intellectual property rights infringement remains entrenched in the Philippines. 21 Pace Int’l L. Rev. 55-135 (2009).
Katz, Ariel. Substitution and Schumpeterian effects over the life cycle of copyrighted works. 49 Jurimetrics J. 113-153 (2009).
Kelly, David M. and Stephanie H. Bald. 2008 trademark decisions of the Federal Circuit. 58 Am. U. L. Rev. 947-973 (2009).
King, Sandra Leigh. While you were sleeping. 11 SMU Sci. & Tech. L. Rev. 291-335 (2008).
Kwoka, Margaret B. Vindicating the rights of people living with AIDS under the Alien Tort Claims Act. 40 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 643-689 (2009).
Lee, Peter. Contracting to preserve open science: consideration-based regulation in patent law. 58 Emory L.J. 889-975 (2009).
Lefstin, Jeffrey A. A formal structure of patent law and the limits of enablement. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1141-1225 (2008).
Lund, Jamie. Copyright genericide. 42 Creighton L. Rev. 131-156 (2009).
Malkan, Jeffrey. Rule-based expression in copyright law. 57 Buff. L. Rev. 433-509 (2009).
Mota, Sue Ann. The doctrine of patent Pierce, N. Scott. Common sense: treating statutory nonobviousness as a novelty issue. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 539-646 (2009).
Munzer, Stephen R. and Phyllis Chen Simon. Territory, plants, and land-use rights among the San of Southern Africa: a case study in regional biodiversity, traditional knowledge, and intellectual property. 17 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 831-894 (2009).
Neal, James G. A lay perspective on the copyright wars: a report from the trenches of the Section 108 Study Group. Horace S. Manges Lecture: April 1, 2008. 32 Colum. J.L. & Arts 193-205 (2009).
Sarnoff, Joshua D. and Christopher M. Holman. Recent developments affecting the enforcement, procurement, and licensing of research tool patents. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1299-1366 (2008).
Schwartz, David L. Courting specialization: an empirical study of claim construction comparing patent litigation before federal district courts and the International Trade Commission. 50 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1699-1737 (2009).
Storm, Christopher S. Federal patent takings. 2 J. Bus. Entrepreneurship & L. 1-29 (2008).
Takenaka, Toshiko. Success or failure? Japan’s national strategy on intellectual property and evaluation of its impact from the comparative law perspective. 8 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev. 379-398 (2009).
Thambisetty, Sivaramjani. Legal transplants in patent law: why “utility” in the new “industrial applicability”. 49 Jurimetrics J. 155-201 (2009).
Torrance, Andrew W. Physiological steps doctrine. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1471-1505 (2008).
Williams, Matt. Congress should amend the Copyright Act to protect transactional watermarks. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1367-1409 (2008).
Zubler, Todd, et al. 2008 patent law decisions of the Federal Circuit. 58 Am. U. L. Rev. 747-945 (2009).

May 2009

Anderson, Horace E., Jr. “Criminal minded?”: mixtape DJs, the piracy paradox, and lessons from the recording industry. 76 Tenn. L. Rev. 111-158 (2008).
Anderson, J. Jonas. Hiding behind nationality: the temporary presence exception and patent infringement avoidance. 15 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 1-51 (2008).
Balganesh, Shyamkrishna. Foreseeability and copyright incentives. 122 Harv. L. Rev. 1569-1633 (2009).
Bently, Lionel. R. v. The Author: from death penalty to community service. 20th Annual Horace S. Manges Lecture, Tuesday, April 10, 2007. 32 Colum. J.L. & Arts 1-109 (2008).
Braegelmann, Tom. Copyright law in and under the Constitution: a comparison between American and German constitutional copyright law. 27 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 99-144 (2009).
Buzzacchi, Luigi and Giuseppe Scellato. Patent litigation insurance and R&D incentives. 28 Int’l Rev. L. & Econ. 272-286 (2008).
Dinwoodie, Graeme B. Developing defenses in trademark law. 13 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 99-153 (2009).
Erlinger, Michael, Jr. An analog solution in a digital world: providing federal copyright protection for pre-1972 sound recordings. 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 45-78 (2009).
Feldman, Yuval. The expressive function of trade secret law: legality, cost, intrinsic motivation, and consensus. 6 J. Empirical Legal Stud. 177-212 (2009)
Fromer, Jeanne C. Patent disclosure. 94 Iowa L. Rev. 539-606 (2009).
Golden, John M. The Supreme Court as “prime percolator”: a prescription for appellate review of questions in patent law. 56 UCLA L. Rev. 657-724 (2009).
Grinvald, Leah Chan. Making much ado about theory: the Chinese Trademark Law. 15 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 53-106 (2008).
Hirshman, Neil S., Michael G. Fatall and Peter M. Spingola. Is silence really golden? Assumption and assignment of intellectual property licenses in bankruptcy. 3 Hastings Bus. L.J. 197-221 (2007).
Ho, Cynthia M. Patent breaking or balancing?: separating strands of fact from fiction under TRIPS. 34 N.C. J. Int’l L. & Com. Reg. 371-469 (2009).
Karjala, Dennis S. Judicial oversight of copyright legislation. 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 253-279 (2008).
Locke, Zac. How to save the recording industry?: charge less. 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 79-88 (2009).
Mueller, Janice M. Chemicals, combinations, and “common sense”: how the Supreme Court’s KSR decision is changing Federal Circuit obviousness determinations in pharmaceutical and biotechnology cases. 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 281-314 (2008).
Munzer, Stephen R. and Kal Raustiala. The uneasy case for intellectual property rights in traditional knowledge. 27 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 37-97 (2009).
Oguamanam, Chidi. Patents and traditional medicine: digital capture, creative legal interventions and the dialectics of knowledge transformation. 15 Ind. J. Global Legal Stud. 489-528 (2008).
O’Regan, Cecily Anne. Is intellectual property a hurdle for transferring technology to developing countries? If so, how high a hurdle? 1 Hastings Sci. & Tech. L.J. 1-19 (2009).
Petherbridge, Lee. The claim construction effect. 15 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 215-266 (2008).
Server, Alfred C., M.D., Nader Mousavi and Jane M. Love. Reach-through rights and the patentability, enforcement, and licensing of patents on drug discovery tools. 1 Hastings Sci. & Tech. L.J. 21-121 (2009).
Spellman, Barbara A. and Frederick Schauer. Artists’ moral rights and the psychology of ownership. 83 Tul. L. Rev. 661-678 (2009).
Vertinsky, Liza. Reconsidering patent licensing in the aftermath of MedImmune. 45 Hous. L. Rev. 1609-1657 (2009).
Weirich, C. Geoffrey and Daniel P. Hart. Protecting trade secrets and confidential information in Georgia. 60 Mercer L. Rev. 533-561 (2009).
White, Katherine E. How the Supreme Court’s decisions over the last decade have re-shaped Federal Circuit jurisprudence. 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 315-324 (2008).

April 2009

Armstrong, Timothy K. Fair circumvention. 74 Brook. L. Rev. 1-50 (2008).
Burrell, Robert and Kimberlee Weatherall. Exporting controversy? Reactions to the copyright provisions of the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement: lessons for U.S. trade policy. 2008 U. Ill. J.L. Tech. & Pol’y 259-319.
Chiappetta, Vincent. Employee blogs and trade secrets: legal response to technological change. 11 NEXUS 31-44 (2006).
de Werra, Jacques. Fighting against biopiracy: does the obligation to disclose in patent applications truly help? 42 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. 143-179 (2009).
Durham, Alan L. Natural laws and inevitable infringement. 93 Minn. L. Rev. 933-997 (2009).
Eng, Regina Nelson. A likelihood of infringement. The purchase and sale of trademarks as AdWords. 18 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 493-541 (2008).
Fagundes, David. Crystals in the public domain. 50 B.C. L. Rev. 139-195 (2009).
Gherman, Sergiu. Harmony and functionality: a gloss on the substantial similarity test in music copyright. 19 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 483-517 (2009).
Gore, Kiran Nasir. Trademark battles in a Babrie-cyber world: trademark protection of website domain names and the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. 31 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 193-221 (2009).
Greenbaum, Dov. Academia to industry technology transfer: an alternative to the Bayh-Dole system for both developed and developing nations. 19 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 311-411 (2009).
Kane, Eileen M. Patent-mediated standards in genetic testing. 2008 Utah L. Rev. 835-874.
Newman, Daniel E. Portraying a branded world. 2008 U. Ill. J.L. Tech. & Pol’y 357-381.
Ng, Alina. The social contract and authorship: allocating entitlements in the copyright system. 19 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 413-482 (2009).
Nihoul, Paul. The limitation of intellectual property in the name of competition. 32 Fordham Int’l L.J. 489-524 (2009).
Osborn, Lucas. Tax strategy patents: why the tax community should not exclude the patent system. 18 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 325-380 (2008).
Pessach, Guy. Reciprocal share-alike exemptions in copyright law. 30 Cardozo L. Rev. 1245-1294 (2008).
Rabinowitz, Aaron B. Criminal prosecution for copyright infringement of unregistered works: a bite at an unripe apple? 49 Santa Clara L. Rev. 793-819 (2009).
Robins, Martin B. Intellectual property and information technology due diligence in mergers and acquisitions: a more substantive approach needed. 2008 U. Ill. J.L. Tech. & Pol’y 321-356.
Roin, Benjamin N. Unpatentable drugs and the standards of patentability. 87 Tex. L. Rev. 503-570 (2009).
Shi, Wei. Incurable or remediable? Clues to undoing the Gordian knot tied by intellectual property rights enforcement in China. 30 U. Pa. J. Int’l L. 541-583 (2008).
Snow, Ned. Copytraps. 84 Ind. L.J. 285-329 (2009).
Sovacool, Benjamin K. Placing a glove on the invisible hand: how intellectual property rights may impede innovation in energy research and development (R & D). 18 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 381-440 (2008).
Strandburg, Katherine J. Evolving innovation paradigms and the global intellectual property regime. 41 Conn. L. Rev. 861-920 (2009).
Whaley, Sean D. “I’m a highway star”: an outline for a federal right of publicity. 31 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 257-282 (2009).
Winickoff, David E., Krishanu Saha and Gregory D. Graff. Opening stem cell research and development: a policy proposal for the management of data, intellectual property, and ethics. 9 Yale J. Health Pol’y L. & Ethics 52-127 (2009).

March 2009

Adler, Amy M. Against moral rights. 97 Cal. L. Rev. 263-300 (2009).
Afori, Orit Fischman. Implied license: an emerging new standard in copyright law. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 275-325 (2009).
Bartow, Ann. The true colors of trademark law: greenlighting a red tide of anti competition blues. 97 Ky. L.J. 263-291 (2008-2009).
Beale, Linda M. Tax shelters and the tax minimization norm: how does the patenting of tax advice transform the (global) playing field. 9 J. L. Soc’y 29-62 (2008).
Citron, Danielle Keats. Cyber civil rights. 89 B.U. L. Rev. 61-125 (2009).
Collins, Kevin Emerson. Propertizing thought. 60 SMU L. Rev. 317-362 (2007).
Einhorn, Michael A. Thinking outside the box: the next generation moves in the music business. 56 J. Copyright Soc’y U.S.A. 201-211 (2008).
Heymann, Laura A. The trademark/copyright divide. 60 SMU L. Rev. 55-102 (2007).
Lemley, Mark A. The surprising virtues of treating trade secrets as IP rights. 61 Stan. L. Rev. 311-353 (2008).
Lemley, Mark A. and Bhaven Sampat. Is the Patent Office a rubber stamp? 58 Emory L.J. 181-206 (2008).
Merges, Robert P. and Jeffrey M. Kuhn. An estoppel doctrine for patented standards. 97 Cal. L. Rev. 1-50 (2009).
Montagnani, Maria Lillà. A new interface between copyright law and technology: how user-generated content will shape the future of online distribution. 26 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 719-773 (2009).
Opderbeck, David W. Patent damages reform and the shape of patent law. 89 B.U. L. Rev. 127-187 (2009).
Ponte, Lucille M. Preserving creativity from endless digital exploitation: has the time come for the new concept of copyright dilution? 15 B.U. J. Sci. & Tech. L. 34-101 (2009).
Quarmby, Ben. Pirates around the Second Life islands--why you should monitor the misuse of your intellectual property in online virtual worlds. 26 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 667-694 (2009).
Risch, Michael. Everything is patentable. 75 Tenn. L. Rev. 591-658 (2008).
Wong, Mary W. S. Toward an alternative normative framework for copyright: from private property to human rights. 26 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 775-843 (2009).

February 2009

Barrett, Margreth. Finding trademark use: the historical foundation for limiting infringement liability to uses “in the manner of a mark”. 43 Wake Forest L. Rev. 893-977 (2008).
Beckerman-Rodau, Andrew. Patents are property: a fundamental but important concept. 4 J. Bus. & Tech. L. 87-96 (2009).
Collins, Kevin Emerson. The reach of literal claim scope into after-arising technology: on thing construction and the meaning of meaning. 41 Conn. L. Rev. 493-559 (2008).
Durie, Daralyn J. and Mark A. Lemley. A realistic approach to the obviousness of inventions. 50 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 989-1020 (2008).
Foley, Thomas B. Show me the money!: third-party copyright infringement liability reaches investors & lenders. 38 Sw. L. Rev. 89-139 (2008).
Folsom, Thomas C. Space pirates, hitchhikers, guides, and the public interest: transformational trademark law in cyberspace. 60 Rutgers L. Rev. 825-918 (2008).
The Foulston Siefkin Lecture. 48 Washburn L.J. 1-132 (2008).
Jorda, Karl F. Patent and trade secret complementariness: an unsuspected synergy. 48 Washburn L.J. 1-31 (2008).
Mazzone, Jason and Matthew Moore. The secret life of patents. 48 Washburn L.J. 33-65 (2008).
Sherwood, Robert M. Trade secret protection: help for a treacherous journey. 48 Washburn L.J. 67-105 (2008).
Henslee, William. Marybeth Peters is almost right: an alternative to her proposals to reform the compulsory license scheme for music. 48 Washburn L.J. 107-132 (2008).
Harkins, Christopher A. Tesla, Marconi, and the great radio controversy: awarding patent damages without chilling a defendant’s incentive to innovate. 73 Mo. L. Rev. 745-816 (2008).
Kahana, Eran, Jonathan T. Rubens and Kristine F. Dorrain. Survey of the law of cyberspace: intellectual property cases 2007. 64 Bus. Law. 157-197 (2008).
Lipton, Jacqueline D. Celebrity in cyberspace: a personality rights paradigm for personal domain name disputes. 65 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1445-1528 (2008).
McGeveran, William. Rethinking trademark fair use. 94 Iowa L. Rev. 49-124 (2008).
Morrison, David M. Bridgeport redux: sampling and audience recoding. 19 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 75-141 (2008).
Mtima, Lateef. So dark the con(tu) of man: the quest for a software derivative work right in section 117. 70 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 1-100 (2008).
Oliar, Dotan and Christopher Sprigman. There’s no free laugh (anymore): the emergence of intellectual property norms and the transformation of stand-up comedy. 94 Va. L. Rev. 1787-1867 (2008).
Pats, Justin. The show must go on: an egalitarian approach to descendibility as applied to a prospective federal personaright statute. 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 37-52 (2008).
Rogoyski, Robert S. Learning the hard way: the anti-circumvention amendments to the Hong Kong Copyright Ordinance. 11 Tul. J. Tech. & Intell. Prop. 35-57 (2008).
Scafidi, Susan. F.I.T: fashion as information technology. 59 Syracuse L. Rev. 69-90 (2008).
Schultz, Mark F. Live performance, copyright, and the future of the music business. 43 U. Rich. L. Rev. 685-764 (2009).
Seville, Catherine. Trade marks. 57 Int’l & Comp. L.Q. 955-967 (2008).
Sung, Lawrence M. In the wake of reinvigorated U.S. Supreme Court activity in patent appeals. 4 J. Bus. & Tech. L. 97-125 (2009).
Symposium: Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1009-1097 (2008).
Burk, Dan L. The role of patent law in knowledge codification. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1009-1034 (2008).
Bagley, Margo A. The need for speed (and grace): issues in a first-inventor-to-file world. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1035-1061 (2008).
Graham, Stuart J. H. and Ted Sichelman. Why do start-ups patent? 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1063-1097 (2008).
Symposium. Publicity Rights in Bytes: Contemporary Issues in Entertainment and Sports Law. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 423-600 (2008).
PANEL 1: Publicity Rights and the Constitution: Privacy, Publicity, and the YouTube Phenomenon
Chemerinsky, Erwin. Protecting truthful speech: narrowing the tort of public disclosure of private facts. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 423-434 (2008).
Ku, Raymond Shih Ray. Is nominal use an answer to the free speech and right of publicity quandary?: lessons from America’s national pastime. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 435-448 (2008).
PANEL 2: Publicity Rights in Entertainment: From Second-Life to the Afterlife
Farber, Eric. U-la-la, what’s happened to our California right of publicity? 11 Chapman L. Rev. 449-463 (2008).
Garon, Jon M. Playing in the virtual arena: avatars, publicity, and identity reconceptualized through virtual worlds and computer games. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 465-519 (2008).
Greene, K. J. Intellectual property expansion: the good, the bad, and the right of publicity. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 521-543 (2008).
Heller, Kathy. Deciding who cashes in on the deceased celebrity business. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 545-568 (2008).
PANEL 3: Publicity Rights in Sports: The Fantasy of Player Statistics Ownership
Mitten, Matthew J. A triple play for the public domain: Delaware Lottery to Motorola to C.B.C. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 569-579 (2008).
Weston, Maureen C. The fantasy of athlete publicity rights: public fascination and fantasy sports’ assertion of free use place athlete publicity rights on an uncertain playing field. 11 Chapman L. Rev. 581-600 (2008).
Taubman, Antony. Rethinking TRIPS: ‘adequate remuneration’ for non-voluntary patent licensing. 11 J. Int’l Econ. L. 927-970 (2008).
Travis, Hannibal. Opting out of the Internet in the United States and the European Union: copyright, safe harbors, and international law. 84 Notre Dame L. Rev. 331-407 (2008).
VerSteeg, Russ. Legal comedy: a study of Terence’s the Phormio. 17 Tul. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 145-175 (2008).
Werbach, Kevin. The centripetal network: how the Internet holds itself together, and the forces tearing it apart. 42 UC Davis L. Rev. 343-412 (2008).

January 2009

Blackman, Josh. Omniveillance, Google, privacy in public, and the right to your digital identity: a tort for recording and disseminating an individual’s image over the Internet. 49 Santa Clara L. Rev. 313-392 (2009).
Bracha, Oren. The ideology of authorship revisited: authors, markets, and liberal values in early American copyright. 118 Yale L.J. 186-271 (2008).
Brenner, Susan W. Fantasy crime: the role of criminal law in virtual worlds. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 1-97 (2008).
Calandrillo, Steve P. and Ewa M. Davison. The dangers of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act: much ado about nothing? 50 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 349-415 (2008).
Cantrell, Deborah J. Common ground: the case for collaboration between anti-poverty advocates and public interest intellectual property advocates. 15 Va. J. Soc. Pol’y & L. 415-445 (2008).
Crouch, Dennis D. The patent lottery: exploiting behavioral economics for the common good. 16 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 141-172 (2008).
Giblin, Rebecca. A bit liable? A guide to navigating the U.S. secondary liability patchwork. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 7-49 (2008).
Hagglund, Ryan. Patentability of human-animal chimeras. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 51-104 (2008).
International and Comparative Aspects of Trademark Dilution Symposium. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 603-773 (2008).
Janis, Mark D. and Peter K. Yu. Introduction: International and Comparative Aspects of Trademark Dilution. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 603-609 (2008).
Gangjee, Dev. The polymorphism of trademark dilution in India. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 611-630 (2008).
Fhima, Ilanah Simon. The fame standard for trademark dilution in the United States and European Union compared. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 631-666 (2008).
Port, Kenneth L. Judging dilution in the United States and Japan. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 667-687 (2008).
Howell, Robert G. Depreciation of goodwill: a “green light” for dilution from the Supreme Court of Canada in accommodating infrastructure. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 689-712 (2008).
Burrell, Robert and Michael Handler. Dilution and trademark registration. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 713-755 (2008).
Nguyen, Xuan-Thao. The other famous marks doctrine. 17 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 757-773 (2008).
Kim, Nancy S. The software licensing dilemma. 2008 BYU L. Rev. 1103-1164.
Nguyen, Xuan-Thao. Justice Scalia’s “renegade jurisdiction”: lessons for patent law reform. 83 Tul. L. Rev. 111-156 (2008).
Perzanowski, Aaron K. The penumbral public domain: constitutional limits on quasi-copyright legislation. 10 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 1081-1145 (2008).
Schultz, Mark and Alec van Gelder. Creative development: helping poor countries by building creative industries. 97 Ky. L.J. 79-148 (2008-2009).
Sudarshan, Ranganath. Nuisance-value patent suits: an economic model and proposal. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 159-189 (2008).
Thomas, Robert E. Debugging software patents: increasing innovation and reducing uncertainty in the judicial reform of software patent law. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 191-241 (2008).

November 2008

Bracha, Oren and Frank Pasquale. Federal search commission? Access, fairness, and accountability in the law of search. 93 Cornell L. Rev. 1149-1209 (2008).
Gómez-Arostegui, H. Tomás. What history teaches us about copyright injunctions and the inadequate-remedy-at-law requirement. 81 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1197-1280 (2008).
Junger, Peter D. You can’t patent software: patenting software is wrong. [Manuscript.] 58 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 333-481 (2008).
Klass, Nadine, et al. Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition nd Tax Law concerning the Commission’s plans to prolong the protection period for performing artists and sound recordings. 39 IIC 586-596 (2008).
Lastowka, Greg. Google’s law. 73 Brook. L. Rev. 1327-1410 (2008).
Loren, Lydia Pallas. The Pope’s copyright? Aligning incentives with reality by using creative motivation to shape copyright protection. 69 La. L. Rev. 1-41 (2008).
Osenga, Kristen. Ants, elephant guns, and statutory subject matter. 39 Ariz. St. L.J. 1087-1126 (2007).
Ramsey, Lisa P. Increasing First Amendment scrutiny of trademark law. 61 SMU L. Rev. 381-458 (2008).
Seymore, Sean B. Heightened enablement in the unpredictable arts. 56 UCLA L. Rev. 127-168 (2008).
Stiglitz, Joseph E. Economic foundations of intellectual property rights. 57 Duke L.J. 1693-1724 (2008).
Torrance, Andrew W. Patents to the rescue--disasters and patent law. 10 DePaul J. Health Care L. 309-358 (2007).

October 2008

Bartholomew, Mark. Advertising and the transformation of trademark law. 38 N.M. L. Rev. 1-48 (2008).
Crawford, Susan P. The radio and the Internet. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 933-1007 (2008).
Friedman, David Adam. Free offers: a new look. 38 N.M. L. Rev. 49-94 (2008).
Fukunaga, Yoshifumi. Enforcing TRIPS: challenges of adjudicating minimum standards agreements. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 867-931 (2008).
Ghosh, Shubha. Decoding and recoding natural monopoly, deregulation, and intellectual property. 2008 U. Ill. L. Rev. 1125-1184.
Irwin, Dana Remus. Paradise lost in the patent law? Changing visions of technology in the subject matter inquiry. 60 Fla. L. Rev. 775-823 (2008).
Murray, Kali N. The cooperation of many minds: domestic patent reform in a heterogeneous regime. 48 IDEA 289-344 (2008).
Netanel, Neil Weinstock. New media in old bottles? Barron’s contextual First Amendment and copyright in the digital age. 76 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 952-985 (2008)
Tushnet, Rebecca. Power without responsibility: intermediaries and the First Amendment. 76 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 986-1016 (2008).
von Lohmann, Fred. Fair use as innovation policy. 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 829-865 (2008).

September 2008

Symposium: Fair Use: “Incredibly Shrinking” or Extraordinarily Expanding? 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 433-635 (2008).
Goldstein, Paul. Fair use in context. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 433-443 (2008).
Heymann, Laura A. Everything is transformative: fair use and reader response. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 445-466 (2008).
Reese, R. Anthony. Transformativeness and the derivative work right. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 467-495 (2008).
Tushnet, Rebecca. User-generated discontent: transformation in practice. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 497-516 (2008).
Beebe, Barton. Does judicial ideology affect copyright fair use outcomes? 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 517-527 (2008).
Kasunic, Robert. Is that all there is? Reflections on the nature of the second fair use factor. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 529-569 (2008).
Liu, Joseph P. Two-factor fair use? 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 571-585 (2008).
Litman, Jessica. Billowing white goo. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 587-601 (2008).
Picker, Randal C. Fair use v. fair access. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 603-616 (2008).
Wu, Tim. Tolerated use. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 617-635 (2008).
Cotter, Thomas F. Fair use and copyright overenforcement. 93 Iowa L. Rev. 1271-1318 (2008).
Economides, Nicholas and William N. Hebert. Patents and antitrust: application to adjacent markets. 6 J. on Telecomm. & High Tech. L. 455-481 (2008).
Gitter, Donna M. Innovators and imitators: an analysis of proposed legislation implementing an abbreviated approval pathway for follow-on biologics in the United States. 35 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 555-625 (2008).
Isaacs, Davida H. Shifting constitutional sands: can and should patentholders rely on the Due Process Clause to thwart government action? 35 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 627-667 (2008).
Kesan, Jay P. and Andres A. Gallo. Pondering the politics of private procedures: the case of ICANN. 4 I/S 345-409 (2008).

August 2008

Abramowicz, Michael and John F. Duffy. Intellectual property for market experimentation. 83 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 337-410 (2008).
Abdel-khalik, Jasmine. Is a rose by any other image still a rose? Disconnecting dilution’s similarity test from traditional trademark concepts. 39 U. Tol. L. Rev. 591-631 (2008).
Appel, Peter A. and T. Rick Irvin. Changing intellectual property and corporate legal structures to promote the U.S. environmental management and technology systems industry. 35 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 397-418 (2008).
Barnes, David W. Misappropriation of trademark. 9 N.C. J.L. & Tech. 171-186 (2008).
Bartow, Ann. Pornography, coercion, and copyright law 2.0. 10 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 799-840 (2008).
Bell, Tom W. The specter of copyism v. blockheaded authors: how user-generated content affects copyright policy. 10 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 841-861 (2008).
Besek, June M. and Philippa S. Loengard. Maintaining the integrity of digital archives. 31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 267-353 (2008).
Bohannan, Christina. Copyright harm, foreseeability, and fair use. 85 Wash. U. L.R. 969-1031 (2007).
Cotter, Thomas F. Toward a functional definition of publication in copyright law. 92 Minn. L. Rev. 1724-1795 (2008).
Golden, John M. Construing patent claims according to their “interpretive community”: a call for an attorney-plus-artisan perspective. 21 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 321-386 (2008).
Hahn, Robert W. and Hal J. Singer. Assessing bias in patent infringement cases: a review of International Trade Commission decisions. 21 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 457-508 (2008).
Hetcher, Steven. User-generated content and the future of copyright: part one--investiture of ownership. 10 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 863-892 (2008).
Karjala, Dennis S. Copyright and creativity. 15 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 169-201 (2008).
Kim, Nancy S. Clicking and cringing. 86 Or. L. Rev. 797-863 (2007).
Kwall, Roberta Rosenthal. The author as steward “for limited times”. (Reviewing Lior Zemer, The Idea of Authorship in Copyright.) 88 B.U. L. Rev. 685-708 (2008).
Lastowka, Greg. User-generated content and virtual worlds. 10 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 893-917 (2008).
Lipton, Jacqueline D. A winning solution for YouTube and Utube? Corresponding trademarks and domain name sharing. 21 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 509-545 (2008).
Lunney, Glynn S., Jr. Copyright’s price discrimination panacea. 21 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 387-456 (2008).
McJohn, Stephen M. Patents: hiding from history. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 961-980 (2008).
Mehra, Salil K. The iPod tax: why the digital copyright system of American law professors’ dreams failed in Japan. 79 U. Colo. L. Rev. 421-465 (2008).
Reidenberg, Joel. Fourth Annual Baker Botts Lecture. The rule of intellectual property law in the Internet economy. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 1073-1095 (2007).
Strandburg, Katherine J. Freedom of association in a networked world: First Amendment regulation of relational surveillance. 49 B.C. L. Rev. 741-821 (2008).
Strandburg, Katherine J. Users as innovators: implications for patent doctrine. 79 U. Colo. L. Rev. 467-544 (2008)
Weiser, Philip J. The next frontier for network neutrality. 60 Admin. L. Rev. 273-322 (2008).
Symposium: Intellectual Property, Trade and Development: Accommodating and Reconciling Different National Levels of Protection. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1109-1626 (2007).
I. Access to Information: Database Protection. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1109-1178 (2007).
Gervais, Daniel J. The protection of databases. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1109-1168 (2007).
Ginsburg, Jane C. A marriage of convenience? A comment on The protection of databases. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1171-1178 (2007).
II. Different Layers of Lawmaking: National, Regional, and International. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1181-1250 (2007).
Bently, Lionel. Copyright, translations, and relations between Britain and India in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1181-1240 (2007).
Dreyfuss, Rochelle C. Creative lawmaking: a comment on Lionel Bently, Copyright, translations, and relations between Britain and India in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1243-1250 (2007).
III. Geographic Indications and Trademarks. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1253-1365 (2007).
Gangjee, Dev. Quibbling siblings: conflicts between trademarks and geographical indications. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1253-1291 (2007).
Cotton, Amy P. 123 years at the negotiating table and still no dessert? The case in support of TRIPS geographical indication protections. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1295-1316 (2007).
Kur, Annette. Quibbling siblings--comments to Dev Gangjee’s presentation. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1317-1327 (2007).
Okediji, Ruth L. The international intellectual property roots of geographical indications. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1329-1365 (2007.
IV. The Role of Industry and Nongovernmental Organizations.
Matthews, Duncan. The role of international NGOs in the intellectual property policy-making and norm-setting activities of multilateral institutions. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1369-1387 (2007).
V. The Role of Contracts and Private Initiatives. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1391-1442 (2007).
Dusollier, Séverine. Sharing access to intellectual property through private ordering. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1391-1435 (2007).
Rai, Arti K. “Open source” and private ordering: a commentary on Dusollier. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1439-1442 (2007).
VI. The Policy-Making Dynamics in Intergovernmental Organizations. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1445-1466 (2007).
Yu, Geoffrey. The structure and process of negotiations at the World Intellectual Property Organization. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1445-1453 (2007).
Visser, Coenraad. The Policy-Making Dynamics in Intergovernmental Organizations: a comment on the remarks of Geoffrey Yu. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1457-1466 (2007).
VII. Access to Essential Medicines. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1469-1554 (2007).
Ho, Cynthia M. A new world order for addressing patent rights and public health. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1469-1515 (2007).
Love, James and Tim Hubbard. The big idea: prizes to stimulate R&D for new medicines. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1519-1554 (2007).
VIII. The Protection of Rights in Plant Varieties. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1557-1626 (2007).
Janis, Mark D. and Stephen Smith. Technological change and the design of plant variety protection regimes. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1557-1615 (2007).
Helfer, Laurence R. The demise and rebirth of plant variety protection: a comment on Technological change and the design of plant variety protection regimes. 82 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 1619-1626 (2007).
Copyright in Context: Institute for Intellectual Property & Information Law Symposium. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 815-1071 (2007).
Joyce, Craig. Introduction. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 815-830 (2007).
Netanel, Neil Weinstock. Maharam of Padua v. Giustiniani: the sixteenth-century origins of the Jewish law of copyright. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 821-870 (2007).
Kwall, Roberta Rosenthal. Originality in context. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 871-899 (2007).
Cotter, Thomas F. Misuse. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 901-964 (2007).
Aoki, Keith. Balancing act: reflections on Justice O’Connor’s intellectual property jurisprudence. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 965-1011 (2007).
Menell, Peter S. Knowledge accessibility and preservation policy for the digital age. 44 Hous. L. Rev. 1013-1071 (2007).
Teaching Intellectual Property Law. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 715-950 (2008).
Bartow, Ann. When bias is bipartisan: teaching about the democratic process in an intellectual property law republic. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 715-733 (2008).
Farley, Christine Haight, Peter Jaszi, Victoria Phillips, Joshua Sarnoff and Ann Shalleck. Clinical legal education and the public interest in intellectual property law. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 735-748 (2008).
Goldman, Eric. Teaching cyberlaw. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 749-763 (2008).
Greene, K. J. “There’s no business like show business”: using multimedia materials to teach entertainment law. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 765-780 (2008).
Heymann, Laura A. The reasonable person in trademark law. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 781-793 (2008).
Holbrook, Timothy R. Patents for poets. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 795-812 (2008).
Kwall, Roberta Rosenthal. Teaching an intellectual property seminar through the legal literature. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 813-821 (2008).
Madison, Michael J. Writing to learn law and writing in law: an intellectual property illustration. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 823-841 (2008).
McKenna, Mark P. Teaching trademark theory through the lens of distinctiveness. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 843-853 (2008).
McManis, Charles R. Teaching current trends and future developments in intellectual property. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 855-875 (2008).
O’Connor, Sean M. Teaching IP from an entrepreneurial counseling and transactional perspective. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 877-891 (2008).
Tushnet, Rebecca. Sight, sound, and meaning: teaching intellectual property with audiovisual materials. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 891-904 (2008).
Welkowitz, David S. and Tyler T. Ochoa. Teaching rights of publicity: blending copyright and trademark, common law and statutes, and domestic and foreign law. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 905-921 (2008).
Yu, Peter K. Teaching international intellectual property law. 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 923-950 (2008).
2008 Santa Clara Computer & High Technology Law Journal Symposium. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 715-960 (2008).
Boone, M. Scott. Virtual property and personhood. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 715-747 (2008).
Dougherty, Candidus and Greg Lastowka. Virtual trademarks. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 749-828 (2008).
Hetcher, Steven. User-generated content and the future of copyright: part two--agreements between users and mega-sites. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 829-867 (2008).
Meeker, Heather. Outsource software development and open source: coming of age in the 2000s. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 869-881 (2008).
Post, David G. Governing cyberspace: law. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 883-913 (2008).
Gard, Elizabeth Townsend and Rachel Goda. The Fizzy Experiment: Second Life, virtual property and a 1L property course. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 915-960 (2008).
McJohn, Stephen M. Patents: hiding from history. 24 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 961-980 (2008).
What Ifs and Other Alternative Intellectual Property and Cyberlaw Stories. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 1-433.
Yu, Peter K. What Ifs and Other Alternative Intellectual Property and Cyberlaw Stories: foreword. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 1-7.
Saunders, Kevin W. What if every “if only” statement were true?: the logic of counterfactuals. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 9-17.
Lemley, Mark A. Ignoring patents. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 19-34.
Gajda, Amy. What if Samuel D. Warren hadn’t married a senator’s daughter?: uncovering the press coverage that led to “the right to privacy”. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 35-60.
Preston, Cheryl B. The Internet and pornography: what if Congress and the Supreme Court had been comprised of techies in 1995-1997? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 61-102.
Garon, Jon M. What if DMR fails?: seeking patronage in the iWasteland and the Virtual O. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 103-151.
Landau, Michael. What if the anti-bootlegging statutes are upheld under the Commerce Clause? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 153-172.
Corbett, Susan. What if object code had been excluded from protection as a literary work in copyright law? A New Zealand perspective. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 173-197.
Drassinower, Abraham. Authorship as public address: on the specificity of copyright vis-à-vis patent and trade-mark. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 199-232.
Tussey, Deborah. What if employees owned their copyrights? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 233-244.
Strandburg, Katherine J. What if there were a business method use exemption to patent infringement? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 245-278.
Vetter, Greg R. Claiming copyleft in open source software: what if the Free Software Foundation’s General Public License (GPL) had been patented? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 279-319.
Winston, Elizabeth I. What if seeds were not patentable? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 321-344.
Calboli, Irene. What if, after all, trademarks were “traded in gross”? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 345-366.
Cross, John T. The lingering legacy of Trade-mark Cases. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 367-388.
Bowal, Peter and Christopher Bowal. What if…the stud does not function? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 389-399.
O’Melinn, Liam Séamus. What if James Madison were to assess the intellectual property revolution? 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 401-412.
Boone, M. Scott. The past, present, and future of computing and its impact on digital rights management. 2008 Mich. St. L. Rev. 413-433.
Business Law Forum. Nonobviousness--The Shape of Things to Come. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 323-598 (2008).
Mandel, Gregory N. Another missed opportunity: the Supreme Court’s failure to define nonobviousness or combat hindsight bias in KSR v. Teleflex. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 323-342 (2008).
Duffy, John F. A timing approach to patentability. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 343-374 (2008).
Eisenberg, Rebecca S. Pharma’s nonobvious problem. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 375-430 (2008).
Dreyfuss, Rochelle Cooper. Nonobviousness: a comment on three learned papers. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 431-441 (2008).
Denicolò, Vincenzo. Economic theories of the nonobviousness requirement for patentability: a survey. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 443-459 (2008).
Sawyer, R. Keith. Creativity, innovation, and obviousness. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 461-487 (2008).
Seifert, Colleen M. Now why didn’t I think of that? The cognitive processes that create the obvious. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 489-507 (2008).
Smith, Steven M. Invisible assumptions and the unintentional use of knowledge and experiences in creative cognition. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 509-525 (2008).
Davidson, Janet and Nicole Greenberg. Psychologists’ views on nonobviousness: are they obvious? 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 527-546 (2008).
Meurer, Michael J. and Katherine J. Strandburg. Patent carrots and sticks: a model of nonobviousness. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 547-578 (2008).
Miller, Joseph Scott. Level of skill and long-felt need: notes on a forgotten future. 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 579-598 (2008)

July 2008

Balganesh, Shyamkrishna. The social costs of property rights in broadcast (and cable) signals. 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1303-1387 (2007).
Bohannan, Christina. Copyright preemption of contracts. 67 Md. L. Rev. 616-671 (2008).
Boone, M. Scott. Ubiquitous computing, virtual worlds, and the displacement of property rights. 4 I/S 91-156 (2008).
Carrier, Michael A. and Greg Lastowka. Against cyberproperty. 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1485-1520 (2007).
Devlin, Alan. Revisiting the presumption of patent validity. 37 Sw. U. L. Rev. 323-369 (2008).
Dolak, Lisa A. and Blaine T. Bettinger. The United States patent system in the media mirror. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 459-521 (2008).
Ghosh, Shubha. Race-specific patents, commercialization, and intellectual property policy. 56 Buff. L. Rev. 409-494 (2008).
Gibson, Christopher S. Globalization and the technology standards game: balancing concerns of protectionism and intellectual property in international standards. 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1403-1484 (2007).
Ginsburg, Jane C. Separating the Sony sheep from the Grokster goats: reckoning the future business plans of copyright-dependent technology entrepreneurs. 50 Ariz. L. Rev. 577-609 (2008).
Greene, K.J. Intellectual property at the intersection of race and gender: lady sings the blues. 16 Am. U. J. Gender Soc. Pol'y & L. 365-385 (2008).
Heald, Paul J. Property rights and the efficient exploitation of copyrighted works: an empirical analysis of public domain and copyrighted fiction bestsellers. 92 Minn. L. Rev. 1031-1063 (2008).
Lee, Edward. Freedom of the press 2.0. 42 Ga. L. Rev. 309-405 (2008).
Lemley, Mark A. The limits of claim differentiation. 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1389-1401 (2007).
Margolis, Stephen E. The profits of infringement: Richard Posner v. Learned Hand. 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1521-1563 (2007).
Ng, Alina. Authors and readers: conceptualizing authorship in copyright law. 30 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 377-417 (2008).
Port, Kenneth L. Trademark extortion: the end of trademark law. 65 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 585-635 (2008).
Prinz zu Waldeck und Pyrmont, Wolrad. Research tool patents after Integra v. Merck--have they reached a safe harbor? 14 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 367-446 (2008).
Stanley, Jeremy. Managing digital rights management: effectively protecting intellectual property and consumer rights in the wake of the Sony CD copy protection scandal. 4 I/S 157-202 (2008).
Symposium: The Future of Patent Reform. 4 I/S 1-87 (2008).
Lee, Edward. Introduction: The Future of Patent Reform. 4 I/S 1-9 (2008).
Collins, Kevin Emerson. Claims to information qua information and a structural theory of Section 101. 4 I/S 11-29 (2008).
Wong, Christopher. Community service: adapting peer review to the patenting process. 4 I/S 31-56 (2008).
Jaffe, Adam B. Patent reform: no time like the present. 4 I/S 59-73 (2008).
Hosie, Spencer. Patent trolls and the new tort reform: a practitioner’s perspective. 4 I/S 75-87 (2008).
Intellectual Property Law for the Global Marketplace. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 709-935 (2007).
Yu, Peter K. Ten common questions about intellectual property and human rights. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 709-753 (2007).
Pager, Sean A. Patents on a shoestring: making patent protection work for developing countries. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 755-808 (2007).
Deazley, Ronan. The life of an author: Samuel Egerton Brydges and the Copyright Act 1814. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 809-846 (2007).
Landau, Michael. Fitting United States copyright law into the international scheme: foreign and domestic challenges to recent legislation. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 847-892 (2007).
Sanders, Anselm Kamperman. Intellectual property, free trade agreements and economic development. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 893-911 (2007).
Brunn, Niklas. Innovation policy, academia and intellectual property rights. 23 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 913-935 (2007).
Symposium. Creators vs. Consumers: The Rhetoric, Reality and Reformation of Intellectual Property Law and Policy. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 427-546 (2008).
Bybee, Keith James. Introduction. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 427-430 (2008).
Greene, K. J. Trademark law and racial subordination: from marketing of stereotypes to norms of authorship. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 431-445 (2008).
Stimson, David C. The empire strikes back--a corporate trademark owner responds to Professor Greene. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 447-457 (2008).
Dolak, Lisa A. and Blaine T. Bettinger. The United States patent system in the media mirror. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 459-521 (2008).
Bell, Tom W. Copyright as intellectual ~~property~~ privilege. 58 Syracuse L. Rev. 523-546 (2008)
Werbach, Kevin. Only connect. 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1233-1301 (2007).

Blogs featuring IP Section Members

Info/Law

43(b)log

Technology and Marketing Law Blog

Lessig.org

scrawford.net

discourse.net

madisonian.net

Sivacracy

Carrollogos

Legal Theory Blog

Antitrust and Competition Policy Blog

Holman's Biotech IP Blog

Patently-O

Email lists of interest to IP Section Members

IPProfs (contact Tom Field, Franklin Pierce Law Center)

Cyberprof (contact Mark Lemley, Stanford University)

IPandBiotech (contact Robin Feldman, UC Hastings)