Watkins\u27 Patent trolls: Predatory litigation and the smothering of innovation (Book Review)

A review of Watkins, W. J., Jr. (2013). Patent trolls: Predatory litigation and the smothering of innovation. Oakland, CA: The Independent Institute. 96 pp. $17.95. ISBN 978159813170

Chelifer longimanus Kollar, 1848: a nomen nudum corresponding to Neobisium spelaeum (Schiödte, 1847) (Pseudoscorpiones: Chelonethi: Neobisiidae)

The manuscript name Chelifer longimanus Kollar, 1848, most often cited as Obisium longimanum Kollar, was first introduced in a note by Kollar (1848) that has been overlooked in the taxonomic literature on pseudoscorpions. No description or indication has been associated with this name, which is therefore a nomen nudum. It corresponds to the valid pseudoscorpion species Neobisium spelaeum (Schiödte, 1847), having been found at one of the type localities of the latter (Postojna Cave, Slovenia). Two specimens originally identified as O. longimanum (probably by V. Kollar) are present in the collections of the Naturhistorisches Museum Wien

The Georgia State University Copyright Case (Cambridge University Press v. Becker) and What It Means for Librarians

The Federal District Court in the Georgia State University copyright case (Cambridge University Press v Becker) constructed a carefully defined, but expansive Fair Use “safe harbor”. Academic libraries and not-for-profit educational institutions can use this “safe harbor” to make copies of copyright-protected materials and distribute them to students in a carefully controlled manner. The decision requires safeguards to help ensure that copies do not get disseminated beyond their intended audience. It also gives more flexibility in cases where publishers do not make smaller excerpts readily available. The Georgia State decision has been reported as allowing up to 10%,or a single chapter of a copyrighted work to be copied as “Fair Use”. This is an over-simplification of the court’s four factor “Fair Use” analysis. If one wishes to make wise, ethical decisions regarding the copying of copyrighted materials, one should have at least a general understanding of the four “Fair Use” factors and know how the court used them in the Georgia State case. The librarian community should also understand that this area of the law is still in a state of flux. This is the first case of its kind and the Publishers have appealed the decision, so it still could be modified on appeal. Other courts could also take a different approach. Still, this is a landmark case that has set a pattern that other courts are likely to follow or react against. The pattern set by this court is one that should allow librarians to act with greater confidence when making reasonable “Fair Use” decisions

Gifts Effected by Written Instrument: Faith Lutheran Home v. Veis

Gifts Effected By Written Instrument: Faith Lutheran Home v. Vei

Securities: The Private Offering Exemption and Rule 146

Securities: The Private Offering Exemption And Rule 14

Gifts Effected by Written Instrument: Faith Lutheran Home v. Veis

Gifts Effected By Written Instrument: Faith Lutheran Home v. Vei

The Georgia State University Copyright Case after the Appeal: Is It More Appealing?

This presentation covers the Appellate Court review of the District Court\u27s findings in the academic publishers\u27 and Copyright Clearance Center\u27s case against Georgia State University\u27s electronic reserve policies