Monthly Archives: May, 2013

Michal Shur-Ofry, ‘IP and the Lens of Complexity’

Abstract: This article examines the intersection of intellectual property and complexity theory. Complexity focuses on systems comprised of a large number of interacting components. It explores the rules governing their behavior and development, and is currently used to analyze and explain a range of human, social, economic and natural phenomena. Its interdisciplinary insights apply to […]

Mark Lunney, ‘Fleming’s Law of Tort: Australian-Made or Foreign Import? Australia’s Role in Making the ‘King’ of Torts’

Abstract: John Fleming’s textbook on the law of torts, now in its 10th edition with new editors, was the publication which founded Fleming’s reputation as an international tort scholar. This article considers the extent to which Fleming’s text was influenced by his presence in Australia as a junior academic at Canberra University College. It is […]

Boilerplate Symposium X A: Professor Radin Responds to Week I

“This is the first part of the tenth in a series of posts reviewing Margaret Jane Radin’s Boilerplate: The Fine Print, Vanishing Rights and the Rule of Law. But don’t think that this is the end. We have more reviews rolling in, and they will go up next week, so stay tuned. In today’s posts, […]

Boilerplate Symposium IX B: Kim Krawiec on Contracts as Disclosure, Part II

“Contract As Disclosure II (Or Why I Keep Signing That Same Stupid Liability Waiver). As I stated in my last post, I want to use the example of the travel company liability waiver at left to illustrate the boilerplate phenomenon. And here is where my analysis would differ from Peggy’s, perhaps in important ways. She […]

Boilerplate Symposium IX A: Kim Krawiec on Contracts as Disclosure, Part I

“This is the first part of the ninth in a series of posts reviewing Margaret Radin’s Boilerplate: The Fine Print, Vanishing Rights and the Rule of Law. Kimberly D Krawiec is the Kathrine Robinson Everett Professor of Law at the Duke University School of Law. Thanks to Jeremy for inviting me to review Peggy Radin’s […]

Feldman and Smith, ‘Behavioral Equity’

Abstract: In many situations legal systems use ambiguous standards and moral language in instructing people to behave. In the realm of the common law, much of this ambiguous, morally inflected legal component is associated with ‘equity’. In civil law systems, something similar goes under the banner of ‘abuse of right’ or ‘abuse of law’. According […]

Boilerplate Symposium VIII: Daniel Schwarcz on a Tort-Based Approach to Standard Form Contracts

“This is the eighth in a series of posts reviewing Margaret Radin’s Boilerplate: The Fine Print, Vanishing Rights and the Rule of Law. Daniel Schwarcz is an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota School of Law. One of the most provocative arguments in Margaret Jane Radin’s bold and compelling book, Boilerplate, is […]

Boilerplate Symposium VII: Oren Bar-Gill on Consent Without Reading

“This is the seventh in a series of posts reviewing Margaret Radin’s Boilerplate: The Fine Print, Vanishing Rights and the Rule of Law. Oren Bar-Gill is a Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Center for Law, Economics and Organization, New York University School of Law. Professor Radin’s book is an eloquent and powerful critique […]

Charlie Irvine, ‘The Proposed Apologies Act for Scotland: Good Intentions with Unforeseeable Consequences’

Abstract: This article considers Scotland’s proposed Apologies Act in the light of experience in other Common Law jurisdictions. A number of Common Law jurisdictions have passed Apologies Acts in the past 25 years, largely motivated by concerns about a ‘litigation explosion’. The idea seems to be that providing evidentiary protection to apologies will encourage their […]

Steven Feldman, ‘Rescission, Restitution and the Principle of Fair Redress: A Response to Professors Brooks and Stremitzer’

Abstract: Brooks and Stremitzer write that a limited rescission model is “excessive” and based on a “misunderstanding” of the economic effects of these remedies.Their key premise is that legal authorities have exaggerated the threat to contract stability and other normative values posed by liberal access to rescission. Therefore, the authors posit that rational parties from […]