In Praise of Marquette Law’s People

One common thread running through many student bloggers on here is their writing at least one piece on the life of a law student.  And for good reason.  After all, law school is our life, from countless hours in the dungeon up on the third floor of the library (read “the cite-check room”) or in the various conference rooms practicing for moot court to slogging through piles of casebooks on the law of torts, contracts, and civil procedure.  Such is, to state the obvious, a far cry from the workload many of us had to endure during our undergraduate studies.   To be sure, it is enough work to add a few gray hairs; I can still remember how often the ASP leaders and faculty during my first-year orientation reassured my classmates and I, “You’re going to be stressed.” “We know it’s hard.” “There’s on-campus psychological counseling available.”  These stresses are so notorious, that my friends and I will frequently joke about how we should tell touring prospective students to get out while they still can.

But here’s the dirty secret: It’s really not that bad.

Continue ReadingIn Praise of Marquette Law’s People

How Can Software Licensing Help Farmers in the Developing World?

Answer: By providing a model for licensing agreements that can protect the farmers’ intellectual property rights in the seed that they use. 

I recently posted on the problem of biopiracy — the appropriation of genetic resources from developing nations by pharmaceutical and other companies.  Similar concerns have been raised about agro-companies obtaining exclusive intellectual property rights in plant genetic resources that have been first developed and used by farmers in developing nations. 

Fortunately, 3L Ryann Beck has come up with a clever solution that involves adapting the open source licencing systems commonly used for computer software.  Under Ryann’s proposal, a nonprofit steward would obtain intellectual property rights in plant genetic materials on behalf of the farmers who developed them.  Packages of the seeds would then be labeled with a “copy-left” license that would preclude purchasers from obtaining enforceable intellectual property rights in the seeds or derivatives of the seeds. 

Ryann’s proposal is contained in a new paper on SSRN.  Her paper got a nice write-up on the IPKat blog a few days ago, and is forthcoming in the Arizona Journal of Environmental Law and Policy.  The abstract appears after the jump. 

Continue ReadingHow Can Software Licensing Help Farmers in the Developing World?

The Constitutionality of Health Reform’s “Individual Mandate”

 

As noted in my blog post last week (“The Beginning of Health Reform“), pushback against the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was swift.  Members of nearly 40 state legislatures have proposed legislation or constitutional amendments limiting or opposing certain provisions of the Act, with most of the proposals targeting the Act’s requirement that individuals have health insurance coverage or subject themselves to financial penalties (the “individual mandate”).  Virginia, Idaho, and Utah are the only states thus far to have enacted new statutes (each of which more or less prohibits compliance with any law that imposes a fine on an individual for declining to enter into a contract for health insurance coverage), and their validity is sure to be challenged in court on Supremacy Clause and other grounds.  Idaho has also passed a non-binding resolution “urging Congress to take action forthwith to amend the United States Constitution by adding a Twenty-eighth Amendment to provide that Congress shall make no law requiring citizens of the United States to enroll in, participate in or secure health care insurance or to penalize any citizen who declines to purchase or participate in any health care insurance program.”

Most dramatic, though—if drama is measured by the amount of media coverage generated—is the lawsuit initiated by the Attorney General of Florida and joined by 19 other state Attorneys General maintaining that several components of the health reform law violate Article I of and the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  The argument that is drawing the most attention concerns the constitutionality of the Act’s individual mandate.  Like the contention at the heart of the state proposals, the Florida lawsuit argues that the Act’s requirement that individuals have health insurance coverage or pay a tax penalty amounts to an unconstitutional mandate that cannot be upheld under the Constitution’s Commerce or Spending Clauses.

The lawsuit seems unlikely to ultimately succeed, given the procedural and substantive hurdles it has to clear. 

Continue ReadingThe Constitutionality of Health Reform’s “Individual Mandate”