The behavior of structures based on the characteristic strain model of creep

There has been much work over the past two decades to aid the design and assessment engineer in the selection of a suitable material model of creep for high temperature applications. The model needs to be simple to implement as well as being able to describe material response over long times. Familiar creep models, as implemented in the majority of nonlinear finite element analysis systems, are still widely used although not always accurate in modeling creep behavior at the end of the secondary phase. The Characteristic Strain Model (CSM) has been shown to be able to effectively model creep behavior at long times; it is simple to implement and requires a minimum of creep data. This paper examines the ability of the CSM to model the recognized behavior of the steady state creep of simple structures under multi-axial stress

The Search for an Author: Shakespeare and the Framers

QC 20141201</p

Open Source Innovation, Patent Injunctions, and the Public Interest

This Article explores the difficulties that high technology markets pose for patent law and, in particular, for patent injunctions. It then outlines the ways in which “open source innovation” is unusually vulnerable to patent injunctions. It argues that courts can recognize this vulnerability, and respond to the particular competitive and innovative benefits of open source innovation, by flexibly applying the Supreme Court’s ruling in eBay v. MercExchange. Having dealt with the lamentable failure of the International Trade Commission to exercise a similar flexibility in its own patent jurisprudence, despite statutory and constitutional provisions that counsel otherwise, the Article concludes with some recommendations for reform

The First Amendment and Cyberspace: The Clinton Years

Both in terms of speech regulation and in terms of providing raw material for the legal controversies that shape the law of the First Amendment, the legacy of Pres Clinton\u27s Administration is considerable, and nowhere more than in cyberspace. The most visible example of the Clinton Administration\u27s role in cyberspeech regulation are the Communications Decency Act, which was struck down by unanimous vote of the Supreme Court in 1997, and the Child Online Protection Act, which is now before the courts

Is Subjectivity Possible - the Post-Modern Subject in Legal Theory

This article puts forward a thesis and then attempts to prove (or at least to develop) that thesis in two related areas. The thesis is that legal theory in general, and critical legal theory in particular, has concentrated too much on critiques of objectivity, wrongly assuming that subjectivity was an unproblematic term. Subjectivity, like mortality, has seemed not only attainable but inevitable. It is objectivity which is presumed to be the problematic goal of our theories and our attempts at doctrinal interpretation. This article reverses the focus, concentrating on the construction of subjectivity in law and social theory... Having pointed out that critical theories focus mainly on the impossibility of reaching objectivity, I show that some of the same critiques can be turned on the construction of subjectivity as well. The parallelism is more than mere symmetry. Just as the concept of objectivity can be used to armour decisions or social practices, so theoretical results and ideological slant can be dictated by loading up the abstract subject of a political or economic theory with a particular set of drives, motivations, and ways of reasoning...I then turn to the legal subject around whom the law revolves and try to develop a sketchy history of the changing qualities which that subject has been believed to possess. I conclude that the ideas associated with postmodernism are a useful framework for understanding the subject in legal theory and in legal practice. In fact, bizarre as it may seem, the law already incorporates a more postmodern view of the subject than either economics or mainstream political theory

Intellectual Property Policy Online: A Young Person’s Guide

This is an edited version of a presentation to the Intellectual Property Online panel at the Harvard Conference on the Internet and Society, May 28-31, 1996. The panel was a reminder of both the importance of intellectual property and the dangers of legal insularity. Of approximately 400 panel attendees, 90% were not lawyers. Accordingly, the remarks that follow are an attempt to lay out the basics of intellectual property policy in a straighforward and non-technical manner. In other words, this is what non-lawyers should know (and what a number of government lawyers seem to have forgotten) about intellectual property policy on the Internet. The legal analysis which underlies this discussion is set out in the Appendix