Faith in the Republic: A Frances Lewis Law Center Conversation

This is a spontaneous conversation discussing Hauserwas’ singular political theology in response to Levinson and Tushnet’s constitutional jurisprudence. It developed into a highly interesting debate concerning constitutional faith. This conversation was recorded at Washington and Lee’s Law Center on December 11, 1987

Faith in the Republic: A Frances Lewis Law Center Conversation

This is a spontaneous conversation discussing Hauserwas’ singular political theology in response to Levinson and Tushnet’s constitutional jurisprudence. It developed into a highly interesting debate concerning constitutional faith. This conversation was recorded at Washington and Lee’s Law Center on December 11, 1987

Reputation in European Trade Mark Law: A Re-examination

Under the harmonised European trade mark regime marks with a reputation enjoy expanded protection. This article casts doubt on whether this ‘reputational trigger’ can be justified. It then explores some difficult operational questions about the way the reputation threshold works in cases where the mark enjoys fame only in niche markets or in a limited geographical area, the aim being to illustrate further why reputation is an unsatisfactory trigger for a different type of trade mark protection. Finally, it looks at some of the evidential difficulties involved in adjudicating disputes in which expanded protection is being claimed. It concludes by suggesting that if the evidential problems we identify were tackled the reputation threshold could be abandoned

Toward International Animal Rights

The chapter starts from the observation that while animal welfare is increasingly protected in domestic jurisdictions, animal rights are still hardly recognised, although they would serve animals better. It argues that animal rights would need to be universalised in order to deploy effects in a globalised setting. The international legal order is flexible and receptive to non-human personhood which goes with rights. Also, the historical experience with international human rights encourages the animal rights project, because it shows how similar conceptual and normative difficulties have been overcome. Animal rights would complement human rights not the least because the entrenchment of the species hierarchy as manifest in the denial of animal rights in the extreme case condones disrespect for the rights of humans themselves

Defining authorship in user-generated content : copyright struggles in The Game of Thrones

The notion of authorship is a core element in antipiracy campaigns accompanying an emerging copyright regime, worldwide. These campaigns are built on discourses that aim to ‘problematize’ the issues of ‘legality’ of content downloading practices, ‘protection’ for content creators and the alleged damage caused to creators’ livelihood by piracy. Under these tensions, fandom both subverts such discourses, through sharing and production practices, and legitimizes industry’s mythology of an ‘original’ author. However, how is the notion of authorship constructed in the cooperative spaces of fandom? The article explores the most popular fandom sites of A Song of Ice and Fire, the book series that inspires the TV-show Game of Thrones and argues that the notion of authorship is not one-dimensional, but rather consists of attributes that develop across three processes: community building, the creative and the industrial/production process. Here, fandom constructs a figure of the ‘author’ which, although more complex than the one presented by the industry in its copyright/anti-piracy campaigns, maintains the status quo of regulatory frameworks based on the idea of a ‘primary’ creator

Activism and Legitimation in Israel's Jurisprudence of Occupation

Colonial law need not exclude the colonized in order to subordinate them, and ‘activist’ courts can advance the effect of subordination no less than ‘passive’ courts. As a case study, this article examines the jurisprudential legacy of the Israeli Supreme Court in the context of the prolonged Israeli occupation of Palestine. Applying insights from legal realist, law and society, and critical legal studies scholarship, the article questions the utility of using the activist and passive labels. It illustrates how the Israeli activist court, through multiple legal and discursive moves, has advanced and legitimated the colonization of Palestine; that the court is aware of its role; and that arguments that focus on the court’s informal role do not mitigate this legitimating effect. Unlike other scholars, the article shows that the Israeli court’s role—by extending the power of judicial review to the military’s actions in the occupied areas—is neither novel nor unique or benevolent, as the British colonization of India and the US colonization of Puerto Rico show

Contextualizing legal norms: a multi-dimensional view of the 2014 legal capital reform in China

This paper intends to shed light on the contentious theme of the reception of legal transplantation in the host environment, by examining the 2014 legislative reform of legal capital in China, which at least on paper imitates the enabling settings of US Revised Model Business Corporation Act (RMBCA). The paper looks at the interconnections between national-specific contextual elements, the resultant complexities, and the spillover effects of transplanted configurations in the unique Chinese socio-cultural setting, implicating the discrepancy between the ‘law in practice’ and the borrowed words ‘on the books’, and suggesting the importance of gaining a holistic understanding of ‘law’ involving the legal traditions in both the donor country and the recipient nation

The democratic constitution: why Europeans should avoid American style constitutional judicial review

Understanding of the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy among legal and political philosophers reflects an idealised account of the US constitution and the nature of judicial review. This view is normatively and empirically flawed. The US constitution is built on pre-democratic assumptions and its counter-majoritarian checks and balances are largely regressive, benefitting privileged minorities over the underprivileged. By contrast, ‘actually existing democracy’, involving competing parties and majority rule, is constitutional in its process and effects, treating all with equal concern and respect, upholding rights and maintaining the rule of law. Judicial review undermines these beneficial qualities