Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels

I. Introduction II. Strict Liability and Negligence in the Law of Accidents ... A. Unilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... B. Bilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... C. The Challenges of Regulating Levels of Activity III. Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright ... A. The Case for Strict Liability in Copyright Law: Generating Authorial Incentives ... B. The Case for Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels IV. Legal Nature of Fair Use as a Negligence Standard ... A. Why Combine Strict Liability with Negligence? ... B. Further Reasons Behind the Choice of the Test ... C. Copyright’s Rule of Reason ... D. A Multifactorial Test: The Role of the Four Factors ... E. Administrating the Multifactorial Test ... F. Copyright Infringement as a Bilateral Accident: When the Rights Holder Has an Incentive to Exercise Due Care V. Case Law Analysis ... A. Institutional Photocopying ... B. Comment and Criticism ... C. News Reporting ... D. Private/Personal Uses … E. Appropriation Art ... F. Uses Facilitating the Access to Information VI. Conclusio

Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels

I. Introduction II. Strict Liability and Negligence in the Law of Accidents ... A. Unilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... B. Bilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... C. The Challenges of Regulating Levels of Activity III. Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright ... A. The Case for Strict Liability in Copyright Law: Generating Authorial Incentives ... B. The Case for Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels IV. Legal Nature of Fair Use as a Negligence Standard ... A. Why Combine Strict Liability with Negligence? ... B. Further Reasons Behind the Choice of the Test ... C. Copyright’s Rule of Reason ... D. A Multifactorial Test: The Role of the Four Factors ... E. Administrating the Multifactorial Test ... F. Copyright Infringement as a Bilateral Accident: When the Rights Holder Has an Incentive to Exercise Due Care V. Case Law Analysis ... A. Institutional Photocopying ... B. Comment and Criticism ... C. News Reporting ... D. Private/Personal Uses … E. Appropriation Art ... F. Uses Facilitating the Access to Information VI. Conclusio

Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels

I. Introduction II. Strict Liability and Negligence in the Law of Accidents ... A. Unilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... B. Bilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... C. The Challenges of Regulating Levels of Activity III. Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright ... A. The Case for Strict Liability in Copyright Law: Generating Authorial Incentives ... B. The Case for Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels IV. Legal Nature of Fair Use as a Negligence Standard ... A. Why Combine Strict Liability with Negligence? ... B. Further Reasons Behind the Choice of the Test ... C. Copyright’s Rule of Reason ... D. A Multifactorial Test: The Role of the Four Factors ... E. Administrating the Multifactorial Test ... F. Copyright Infringement as a Bilateral Accident: When the Rights Holder Has an Incentive to Exercise Due Care V. Case Law Analysis ... A. Institutional Photocopying ... B. Comment and Criticism ... C. News Reporting ... D. Private/Personal Uses … E. Appropriation Art ... F. Uses Facilitating the Access to Information VI. Conclusio

Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels

I. Introduction II. Strict Liability and Negligence in the Law of Accidents ... A. Unilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... B. Bilateral Accidents: Care and Activity Levels ... C. The Challenges of Regulating Levels of Activity III. Strict Liability and Negligence in Copyright ... A. The Case for Strict Liability in Copyright Law: Generating Authorial Incentives ... B. The Case for Negligence in Copyright Law: Fair Use as Regulation of Activity Levels IV. Legal Nature of Fair Use as a Negligence Standard ... A. Why Combine Strict Liability with Negligence? ... B. Further Reasons Behind the Choice of the Test ... C. Copyright’s Rule of Reason ... D. A Multifactorial Test: The Role of the Four Factors ... E. Administrating the Multifactorial Test ... F. Copyright Infringement as a Bilateral Accident: When the Rights Holder Has an Incentive to Exercise Due Care V. Case Law Analysis ... A. Institutional Photocopying ... B. Comment and Criticism ... C. News Reporting ... D. Private/Personal Uses … E. Appropriation Art ... F. Uses Facilitating the Access to Information VI. Conclusio

Emerging Scholars Series: Trade Dress Rights as Instruments of Monopolistic Competition: Towards a Rejuvenation of the Misappropriation Doctrine in Unfair Competition Law and a Property Theory of Trademarks

The protection of trade dress restricts the ability of competitors to compete by imitation. It may also interfere with the public’s ability to copy product features that have been disclosed in expired utility and design patents. These concerns about the anticompetitive potential of trade dress claims have prompted the Supreme Court to tighten the requirements for protecting product configurations under the Lanham Act. To be protectable, the design under consideration should have already acquired secondary meaning. Furthermore, the functionality doctrine may bar protection even though there are enough alternative product configurations at the disposal of competitors so as to market substitutable goods. The conventional approach to the optimal scope of trade dress rights could be challenged by a reassessment of the effect of their protection on competition. This Paper conducts an economic analysis of trade dress protection based on the theory of product differentiation. In economic terms, the choice of trade dress amounts to a business decision to differentiate by product design. Differentiation allows the exercise of market power within the market niche consisting of the consumers that have a preference for a specific product design. Despite this price, premium consumer welfare increases overall because the existence of product variety allows for the satisfaction of diverse consumer preferences. Competition becomes more dynamic as firms seek to market products that come closer to the taste of the targeted consumer group. The main implication for trademark and unfair competition theory is that the intangible value of goodwill created by product differentiation should be protected against free-riding. Such protection is not simply intended to favor the trademark holder, but rather to promote dynamic competition with differentiated products. In view of the principle of complementarity between intellectual property rights and competition law, this Paper analyzes how trademark and unfair competition law could regulate imitative activity in the marketplace so as to foster the effectiveness of competition. On the other hand, trade dress protection might lead to monopolization of submarkets and suppress locational competition in product space. These anticompetitive effects could be effectively addressed by an application of the functionality doctrine. The submarket analysis links the limits of trade dress rights to the valuations of the Sherman Act. This Paper also examines the phenomenon of the cumulative protection of trade dress through copyright, patent and trademark law. In this context, it also addresses the problem of determining the circumstances under which trade dress becomes the practical equivalent of an expired patent, a question left open by the Supreme Court in Traffix

Spontaneous rupture of a giant renal angiomyolipoma—Wunderlich’s syndrome: Report of a case

AbstractIntroductionHerein we present a rare case of pontaneous rupture of a giant renal angiomyolipoma (AML), with symptoms of hypovolemic shock (Wunderlich’s syndrome), which was managed by urgent total nephrectomy.Presentation of caseA 53 year old female was transferred to the emergency room with progressive acute painful swelling of the left lateral abdominal area, duration of 5h. An emergent ultrasonic examination, revealed a heterogeneous—solid mass with maximum diameter of 23cm, with probable origin from the left kidney. Due to worsening of the clinical status (hypovolemic shock), loss of consciousness and acute drop of haematocrit level to 17.8%, the patient was urgently intubated in the emergency room and transferred to the operating theater. A giant haemorrhagic mass was found originating from the left kidney, which removed en-block with the left kidney. The patient was transferred to the intensive care unit. Her recovery was uneventful. The histopathologic examination revealed a giant renal angiomyolipoma (25×18×8cm) with extensive bleeding.DiscussionEnlarged renal AMLs can rupture. This can be sudden and painful with manifestations of hypovolemic shock. The management of AMLs has been correlated with symptoms. Patients with life-threatening retroperitoneal haemorrhage, require urgent exploration as retroperitoneal bleeding can lead to severe complications, increasing morbidity.ConclusionIn case of giant angiomyolipoma with intratumoral haemorrhage, and symptoms of Wunderlich’s syndrome, partial or total nephrectomy is a good treatment option in order to save the patient’s life

Mechanisms of Atrial Fibrillation: How Our Knowledge Affects Clinical Practice

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a very common arrhythmia that mainly affects older individuals. The mechanism of atrial fibrillation is complex and is related to the pathogenesis of trigger activation and the perpetuation of arrhythmia. The pulmonary veins in the left atrium arei confirm that onfirm the most common triggers due to their distinct anatomical and electrophysiological properties. As a result, their electrical isolation by ablation is the cornerstone of invasive AF treatment. Multiple factors and comorbidities affect the atrial tissue and lead to myocardial stretch. Several neurohormonal and structural changes occur, leading to inflammation and oxidative stress and, consequently, a fibrotic substrate created by myofibroblasts, which encourages AF perpetuation. Several mechanisms are implemented into daily clinical practice in both interventions in and the medical treatment of atrial fibrillation