Introduction

The four articles in this issue all contribute to the dialogue surrounding the intersection of indigenous people’s rights within international law and domestic actions that conflict with those rights. While the UNDRIP and other international law instruments are explicit about how states should act towards indigenous populations, in many cases these international instruments conflict with domestic law. There are several reasons for this discrepancy, including states’ self-interest, paternalism, and lack of resources needed to address both national concerns and the rights of indigenous peoples

Introduction: Indigenous Rights in the Pacific Rim

The four articles in this issue all contribute to the dialogue surrounding the intersection of indigenous people\u27s rights within international law and domestic actions that conflict with those rights. While the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other international law instruments are explicit about how states should act towards indigenous populations, in many cases these nternational instruments conflict with domestic law. There are several reasons for this discrepancy, including states\u27 self-interest, paternalism, and lack of resources needed to address both national concerns and the rights of indigenous peoples

The Understanding of a Single Story: Identities Amongst Black Students at Predominately White Institutions

This paper examines the structure of identities amongst Black students at predominately white institutions – particularly focusing on Wofford College. Extensive focus groups were conducted with members of the Black student body to further progress research. Racism regarding Black students and their social identity in addition to how it has structured the social identity amongst students are introduced in along with the identities of students on Wofford’s campus. Discrimination on campus has had the effect of narrowing Black students’ options for creating social identity and participating in campus community life. Black students regularly face a very confining choice to either socialize with a black community only, assimilate into a predominately white community, or float between both white and black communities, but never achieve a complete sense of belonging into either group due to their divided loyalties to these two groups. The limiting identity choices affect not only the social behavior, but also individual identities and academic performance amongst students of color

Gallagher Law Library, University of Washington School of Law

There’s no denying that academic law libraries are a vital part of the legal profession. Since 1928, law schools have been required to have a library located in a building occupied by the law school. Traditionally, these libraries were characterized by direct reporting to the law school dean, budget allocation from the law school dean or the university’s central administration, and a law library mission with a law school-centered approach. However, in today’s economic climate, financial and operational efficiency is more critical than ever before— which makes organizational structure vital for law libraries to consider, as demonstrated by the growing interest in the semiautonomous library structure. The first volume in a series, this book provides 18 case studies of academic law libraries across the country, across the entire spectrum of structures, from autonomous to semiautonomous and a blend of the two. With its unique insight into the culture of each campus, law school, and law library, this book is a must-read for anyone seeking to streamline their law library’s operations and boost their bottom line while still serving the diverse needs of students and faculty.https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/librarians-chapters/1022/thumbnail.jp

One Piece of the Collection Development Puzzle: Issues in Drafting Format Selection Guidelines

New electronic formats have made collection development decisions more complex. Mr. Franklin discusses how to incorporate a library\u27s primary goals and resource limitations into library-specific format selection guidelines, and proposes criteria to help selectors choose the appropriate format for specific resources. A format selection checklist is appended. para This paper won the student division of the American Association of Law Libraries / LexisNexis Call for Papers Award in 1994

Why Let Them Go? Retaining Experienced Librarians by Creating Challenging Internal Career Paths: Introducing the `Executive Librarian\u27?

In a traditional hierarchical library, librarians often must leave the institution to move up the career ladder The library loses an experienced librarian and must also invest a substantial amount of time and money to train a new employee. The author argues that libraries should attempt to retain experienced librarians by creating continuously challenging career paths with equivalent rewards. He proposes a new type of position—that of executive librarian—that would include increasingly individualized job content, a voice in institutional decision making, and optional administrative responsibilities

Managing Your Library

Managing Your Library Hiring a Librarian Selecting Materials Managing Your Library: A Selected Bibliography Library Support Services in King County Document Delivery Services Legal Publishers and Distributors: A Selected List of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho Legal Publishers Publishers of Current Washington Legal Periodicalshttps://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/librarians-chapters/1012/thumbnail.jp

Privately Legislated Intellectual Property Rights: Reconciling Freedom of Contract with Public Good Uses of Information

In an age of omnipresent clickwrap licenses, we acknowledge the need for a uniform set of default rules that would validate non-negotiable licenses as a mechanism for minimizing transaction costs likely to hinder economic development in a networked environment. However, we contend that any model of contract formation not driven by the traditional norms of mutual assent requires specially formulated doctrinal tools to avoid undermining long-established public good uses of information for such purposes as education and research, technical innovation, free speech, and the preservation of free competition. With the convergence of digital and telecommunications technologies, creators and innovators who distribute computerized information goods online can increasingly combat the causes of market failure directly-even in the absence of statutory intellectual property rights-by recourse to standard form contractual agreements that allow access to electronically stored information only on the licensor\u27s terms and conditions. In the networked environment, however, routine validation of mass-market access contracts and of non-negotiable constraints on users would tend to convert standard form licenses of digitized information goods into functional equivalents of privately legislated intellectual property rights. Firms possessing any degree of market power could thereby control access to, and use of, digitized information by means of adhesion contracts that alter or ignore the balance between incentives to create and free competition that the Framers recognized in the Constitution and that Congress has progressively codified in statutory intellectual property laws. Because existing legal doctrines appear insufficient to control the likely costs of such a radical social experiment, the main thrust of this Article is to formulate and develop minimalist doctrinal tools to limit the misuse of adhesion contracts that might otherwise adversely affect the preexisting balance of public and private interests. We believe such tools ought to figure prominently in any set of uniform state laws governing computerized information transactions, whether or not they emerge from the current debate surrounding a proposed Article 2B of the Uniform Commercial Code ( U.C.C. or the Code ). In Part I of this Article, we begin by identifying key misconceptions concerning the interface between federal intellectual property rights and state contract laws that have marred the drafters\u27 own notes and comments in the various iterations of Article 2B. We then explain how digital technologies, when combined with mass-market contracts, enable information providers to alter the existing legislative balance between public and private interests in unexpected and socially harmful ways. We further demonstrate that the uniform state laws proposed to validate these private rights have been crafted without balancing the social costs of legal incentives to innovate against the benefits of free competition, and without regard for the constitutional mandate to promote the [p]rogress of [s]cience and useful [a]rts.\u27\u27 On the contrary, the drafters of Article 2B empower purveyors of digitized information goods to undermine, by contract, long-standing policies and practices that directly promote cumulative and sequential innovation as well as the public interest in education, science, research, competition, and freedom of expression. In Part II, we discuss the new doctrinal tools with which we would empower courts to apply public-interest checks on standardized access contracts and on non-negotiable terms and conditions affecting users of computerized information goods. In so doing, we take pains to preserve the maximum degree of freedom of contract, not just with respect to negotiated terms generally, but even with respect to non-negotiable terms lacking any socially harmful or demonstrably anticompetitive impact over time. We also compare the costs and benefits of Article 2B, as refined by the addition of our proposed safeguards, with those likely to ensue if Article 2B were adopted in its present form. Here, we focus particularly on issues affecting the legal protection of computer software, on the role that the fair use exception of copyright law might play in information transactions generally, and on issues affecting bundles of factual information that cannot be copyrighted under existing laws. In Part III, we explore the deeper implications of a shift from the traditional, assent-driven model of contract formation to a model that validates non-negotiable contracts of adhesion containing socially acceptable terms and conditions. We show that a minimalist regulatory tool along the lines of our proposed public-interest unconscionability doctrine yields positive social benefits, despite the transaction costs and enforcement problems it logically engenders. We also explore the connection between the kind of non-negotiable middle ground we deem indispensable to a paradigm shift in contract formation and the need for a broader information policy. We conclude with a prediction that if Article 2B were to incorporate the safeguards we propose, it might better yield sound empirical data for devising the long-term information policies that elude us in our present state of ignorance and uncertainty

International Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in the Era of Global Networks: Irrelevance of, Goals for, and Comments on the Current Proposals

The Hague Convention attempts to harmonize bases of jurisdiction and make enforcement of foreign judgments routine. At the same time, the diversity in substantive national laws in intellectual property and other areas permits nations to experiment with new and different approaches. A good international legal system will improve transnational litigation without running roughshod over national socio-cultural values, as embodied especially in intellectual property law. This Article ponders disparate factors that could diminish the importance of the whole effort, considers some values that should guide the effort if it is to go forward, and then reviews how selected provisions of the draft Hague Convention and the Dreyfuss-Ginsberg proposal meet these challenges

International Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in the Era of Global Networks: Irrelevance of, Goals for, and Comments on the Current Proposals

Last fall a Symposium at Chicago-Kent College of Law entitled Constructing International Intellectual Property Law: The Role of National Courts, held on October 18-19, 2001, brought together scholars interested in a group of problems related to the relationship between harmonized rules of international civil procedure and diverse nationally-based rules of intellectual property. Subsequently, extensive discussions between the authors developed this Article into its present form