What’s Wrong With Victims’ Rights in Juvenile Court?: Retributive v. Rehabilitative Systems of Justice

While scholars have written extensively about the victims’ rights movement in capital and criminal cases, there has been very little discussion about the intersection of victims’ rights and the juvenile justice system. Statutes that allow victims to attend juvenile hearings and present oral and written impact statements have shifted the juvenile court’s priorities and altered the way judges think about young offenders. While judges were once primarily concerned with the best interests of the delinquent child, victims’ rights legislation now requires juvenile courts to balance the rehabilitative needs of the child with other competing interests such as accountability to the victim and restoration of communities impacted by crime. In this article, I contend that victim impact statements move the juvenile court too far away from its original mission and ignore the child’s often diminished culpability in delinquent behavior. I also argue that victim impact statements delivered in the highly charged environment of the courtroom are unlikely to achieve the satisfaction and catharsis victims seek after crime. To better serve the needs of the victim and the offender, I propose that victim impact statements be excluded from the juvenile disposition hearing and incorporated into the child’s long-term treatment plan. Interactive victim awareness programs, such as victim-offender mediation and victim impact panels that take place after disposition, allow victims to express pain and fear to the offender, foster greater empathy and remorse from the child, and encourage forgiveness and reconciliation by the victim. Delaying victim impact statements until after the child’s disposition also preserves the child’s due process rights at sentencing and allows the court to focus on the child’s need for rehabilitation

Several Essays and Statements

Milton Konvitz (Ph.D. \u2733) embodied the spirit of Cornell University. An authority on civil rights and human rights, and constitutional and labor law, he served on the Cornell faculty for 27 years, holding dual appointments at the Law School and the School of Industrial and Labor Relations. This section features essays and statements by Milton R. Konvitz: Closing Remarks at the End of the American Ideals Course; Change and Tradition--A Letter to David Daiches; Liberal and Illiberal Education; Why One Professor Changed His Voice; and Of Exile and Double Consciousness: A Reply to Max Beloff

Recommendations for Standardized International Rights Statements

Europeana, the Digital Public Library of America (DPLA), and many other 1 2 libraries, archives and other cultural heritage institutions believe that everyone should be able to engage with their cultural heritage online. We can help achieve this by giving cultural heritage institutions simple and standardized terms to summarize the copyright status of Works in their collection and how they may be used. These simple and standardized terms we call “Rights Statements.” Providing this information is essential for those who wish to actively engage with the Works they find online. Can they use it in a school report? Print it on a tshirt? Integrate it into a commercial app? Currently, there is no global approach to rights statements that works for a broad set of institutions, leading to a confusing proliferation of terms. Simplifying the use and application of Rights Statements benefits both contributing organizations, which share their valuable collections online through aggregators such as Europeana and the DPLA, and the people who engage with those collections. Thus, we outline minimum, baseline standards for organizations contributing to the DPLA, Europeana and any other digital aggregator that adopts the rightsstatements.org standard. Rightsstatements.org establishes the vocabulary that every organization can use to talk to their audiences about copyright and related rights in a meaningful way. It provides the technical and governance infrastructure to support their development and adoption, and ensure their ongoing relevance. In this paper, the product of a joint DPLA–Europeana Rights Statements Working Group, we recommend a series of Rights Statements that are simple, flexible and descriptive. We propose ten Rights Statements that the DPLA and Europeana partners can implement to communicate to users the copyright and related restrictions on use of Items in their collections. We propose to host these statements at rightsstatements.org, allowing each Item to which they are applied to be linked to the definitive explanation of its terms. The Rights Statements we recommend need to be understood by both machines and humans, making the concepts around copyright and related rights clear and understandable to all. By doing that, we can educate and encourage people to use cultural heritage material to the fullest extent possible while respecting copyright and related restrictions on reuse. The recommendations outlined in this document support a framework that promotes appropriate use of collections held by cultural heritage institutions through openness, accuracy, simplicity and clarity. The simple, flexible framework advocates for the uniform description of baseline copyright status information that is easily translatable for people and machines. This group intends that this document be a call to action for institutions to implement these statements locally and to begin the work of educating their users and enhancing their abilities to reuse Works in their collections more broadly. The Rights Statements Working Group of the International Rights Statement Working Group is cochaired by E mily Gore, Director of Content for DPLA, and P aul Keller, Director of Kennisland & Copyright Advisor to Europeana, with members: Greg Cram , Associate Director of Copyright & Intellectual Property, New York Public Library Julia Fallon , IPR and Policy Advisor, Europeana Lucie Guibault , Associate professor, Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam Karen Estlund, Associate Dean for Technology and Digital Strategies, Penn State University Libraries David Hansen , Assistant Clinical Professor & Faculty Research Librarian, UNC School of Law Antoine Isaac , R&D Manager, Europeana Tom Johnson , Metadata & Platform Architect, DPLA Melissa Levine , Lead Copyright Officer, University of Michigan Library Mark A. Matienzo , Director of Technology, DPLA Patrick Peiffer , Digital Librarian, Bibliothèque nationale de Luxembourg Amy Rudersdorf , Assistant Director of Content, DPLA Richard J. Urban, Assistant Professor, Florida State University College of Communication & Information Maarten Zeinstra , Technical Coordinator, Europeana Licensing Framework, Kennisland Matt Lee , Technical Lead, Creative Commons Diane Peters , General Counsel, Creative Common

The sharing of rights and information in a capability-based protection system

The question of sharing of rights and information in the Take-Grant Protection Model is examined by concentrating on the similarities between the two; in order to do this, new theorems are stated and proven for each that specifically show the similarities. The proof for one of the original theorems is also provided. These statements of necessary and sufficient conditions are contrasted to illustrate the proposition that transferring rights and transferring information are fundamentally the same, as one would expect in a capability-based system. Directions are then discussed for future research in light of these results

Recommendations for Standardized International Rights Statements

Europeana, the Digital Public Library of America (DPLA), and many other 1 2 libraries, archives and other cultural heritage institutions believe that everyone should be able to engage with their cultural heritage online. We can help achieve this by giving cultural heritage institutions simple and standardized terms to summarize the copyright status of Works in their collection and how they may be used. These simple and standardized terms we call “Rights Statements.” Providing this information is essential for those who wish to actively engage with the Works they find online. Can they use it in a school report? Print it on a tshirt? Integrate it into a commercial app? Currently, there is no global approach to rights statements that works for a broad set of institutions, leading to a confusing proliferation of terms. Simplifying the use and application of Rights Statements benefits both contributing organizations, which share their valuable collections online through aggregators such as Europeana and the DPLA, and the people who engage with those collections. Thus, we outline minimum, baseline standards for organizations contributing to the DPLA, Europeana and any other digital aggregator that adopts the rightsstatements.org standard. Rightsstatements.org establishes the vocabulary that every organization can use to talk to their audiences about copyright and related rights in a meaningful way. It provides the technical and governance infrastructure to support their development and adoption, and ensure their ongoing relevance. In this paper, the product of a joint DPLA–Europeana Rights Statements Working Group, we recommend a series of Rights Statements that are simple, flexible and descriptive. We propose ten Rights Statements that the DPLA and Europeana partners can implement to communicate to users the copyright and related restrictions on use of Items in their collections. We propose to host these statements at rightsstatements.org, allowing each Item to which they are applied to be linked to the definitive explanation of its terms. The Rights Statements we recommend need to be understood by both machines and humans, making the concepts around copyright and related rights clear and understandable to all. By doing that, we can educate and encourage people to use cultural heritage material to the fullest extent possible while respecting copyright and related restrictions on reuse. The recommendations outlined in this document support a framework that promotes appropriate use of collections held by cultural heritage institutions through openness, accuracy, simplicity and clarity. The simple, flexible framework advocates for the uniform description of baseline copyright status information that is easily translatable for people and machines. This group intends that this document be a call to action for institutions to implement these statements locally and to begin the work of educating their users and enhancing their abilities to reuse Works in their collections more broadly. The Rights Statements Working Group of the International Rights Statement Working Group is cochaired by E mily Gore, Director of Content for DPLA, and P aul Keller, Director of Kennisland & Copyright Advisor to Europeana, with members: Greg Cram , Associate Director of Copyright & Intellectual Property, New York Public Library Julia Fallon , IPR and Policy Advisor, Europeana Lucie Guibault , Associate professor, Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam Karen Estlund, Associate Dean for Technology and Digital Strategies, Penn State University Libraries David Hansen , Assistant Clinical Professor & Faculty Research Librarian, UNC School of Law Antoine Isaac , R&D Manager, Europeana Tom Johnson , Metadata & Platform Architect, DPLA Melissa Levine , Lead Copyright Officer, University of Michigan Library Mark A. Matienzo , Director of Technology, DPLA Patrick Peiffer , Digital Librarian, Bibliothèque nationale de Luxembourg Amy Rudersdorf , Assistant Director of Content, DPLA Richard J. Urban, Assistant Professor, Florida State University College of Communication & Information Maarten Zeinstra , Technical Coordinator, Europeana Licensing Framework, Kennisland Matt Lee , Technical Lead, Creative Commons Diane Peters , General Counsel, Creative Common

European Court of Human Rights: Pinto Coelho v. Portugal (no. 2)

In a judgment of 22 March 2016 the European Court of Human Rights found that Portugal has violated a journalist’s right to report about the hearing in a criminal case. The European Court emphasises that the domestic court hearing was public and that the criminal conviction of the journalist for having broadcast unauthorised recordings of statements of witnesses during the hearing was not necessary in a democratic society. Therefore the journalist’s conviction amounted to a breach of Article 10 of the European Convention

Comments on Draft General Comment 37 on Article 21 ICCPR: The Right of Peaceful Assembly

This report seeks to inform the drafting of General Comment 37 on article 21 ICCPR, the right to freedom of peaceful assembly. It compiles key principles elaborated in the Committee’s freedom of assembly jurisprudence and relevant declarative statements in the Committee’s Concluding Observations on State reports. The report seeks to identify both the issues and themes that General Comment 37 might most usefully address, and further topics that might benefit from further clarification. The report thus seeks to provide the Human Rights Committee with a resource during the drafting of General Comment 37

C1 inhibitor deficiency: 2014 United Kingdom consensus document

C1 inhibitor deficiency is a rare disorder manifesting with recurrent attacks of disabling and potentially life-threatening angioedema. Here we present an updated 2014 United Kingdom consensus document for the management of C1 inhibitor-deficient patients, representing a joint venture between the United Kingdom Primary Immunodeficiency Network and Hereditary Angioedema UK. To develop the consensus, we assembled a multi-disciplinary steering group of clinicians, nurses and a patient representative. This steering group first met in 2012, developing a total of 48 recommendations across 11 themes. The statements were distributed to relevant clinicians and a representative group of patients to be scored for agreement on a Likert scale. All 48 statements achieved a high degree of consensus, indicating strong alignment of opinion. The recommendations have evolved significantly since the 2005 document, with particularly notable developments including an improved evidence base to guide dosing and indications for acute treatment, greater emphasis on home therapy for acute attacks and a strong focus on service organisation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved