| General note |
Description:<br/><br/>This single volume is an authoritative collection of scholarship examining many facets of the public domain. This publication collects key papers which examine the various justifications for a rich repository of publicly-available information, including policies favoring robust competition, free speech, and scientific and technological advance. It also explores problems in ensuring access to public domain works, as well as commons management mechanisms. Perspectives on the dynamic between the public domain and the creation of new works are also presented.<br/><br/>With an original introduction by the editors, this insightful book provides students and researchers with a consideration of the public domain as an important topic in its own right as well as shedding light on the underlying rationales of intellectual property law. <br/><br/>Table of Contents:<br/><br/>Introduction Robert P. Merges and Amy L. Landers<br/><br/>PART I DEFINING THE PUBLIC DOMAIN<br/>1. David Lange (1981), ‘Recognizing the Public Domain’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 44 (4), Autumn, 147–78<br/><br/>2. Jessica Litman (1990), ‘The Public Domain’, Emory Law Journal, 39 (4), Fall, 965–1023<br/><br/>3. Pamela Samuelson (2006), ‘Enriching Discourse on Public Domains’, Duke Law Journal, 55 (4), February, 783–834<br/><br/>PART II Justifications FOR the Public Domain<br/>4. Yochai Benkler (1999), ‘Free as the Air to Common Use: First Amendment Constraints on Enclosure of the Public Domain’, New York University Law Review, 74 (2), May, 354–446<br/><br/>5. Julie E. Cohen (2005), ‘The Place of the User in Copyright Law’, Fordam Law Review, 74 (2), November, 347–74<br/><br/>6. Wendy J. Gordon (1993), ‘A Property Right in Self Expression: Equality and Individualism in the Natural Law of Intellectual Property’, Yale Law Journal, 102 (7), May, 1533–609<br/><br/>7. Lawrence Lessig (2004), ‘Free(ing) Culture for Remix’, Utah Law Review, 961–75<br/><br/>8. Paul Goldstein (1971), ‘The Competitive Mandate: From Sears to Lear’, California Law Review, 59 (4), June, 873–904<br/><br/>PART III ACCESS TO INFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN<br/>9. James Boyle (2003), ‘The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 66 (1/2), Winter/Spring, 33–74<br/><br/>10. Randal C. Picker (2012), ‘Access and the Public Domain’, San Diego Law Review, 49, 1183–214<br/><br/>11. Robert P. Merges (1996), ‘Property Rights Theory and the Commons: The Case of Scientific Research’, Social Philosophy and Policy, 13 (2), July, 145–67<br/><br/>12. Rochelle Dreyfuss (2004), ‘Protecting the Public Domain of Science: Has the Time for an Experimental Use Defense Arrived?’, Arizona Law Review, 46 (3), 457–72<br/><br/>PART IV CREATING WITHIN THE COMMONS<br/>13. Lawrence Lessig (2004), ‘The Creative Commons’, Montana Law Review, 65 (1), Winter, 1–13<br/><br/>14. Yochai Benkler (2002), ‘Coase’s Penguin or, Linux and “The Nature of the Firm”’, Yale Law Journal, 112 (3), December, 369–446<br/><br/>15. Jason Schultz and Jennifer M. Urban (2012), ‘Protecting Open Innovation: The Defensive Patent License as a New Approach to Patent Threats, Transaction Costs, and Tactical Disarmament’, Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 26 (1), Fall, 1–67<br/><br/>16. Michael J. Madison, Brett M. Frischmann and Katherine J. Strandburg (2010), ‘Constructing Commons in the Cultural Environment’, Cornell Law Review, 95 (4), 657–709<br/><br/>PART V REFLECTIONS ON THE PUBLIC DOMAIN<br/>17. Robert P. Merges (2004), ‘A New Dynamism in the Public Domain’, University of Chicago Law Review, 71 (1), Winter, 183–203<br/><br/>18. Anupam Chander and Madhavi Sunder (2004), ‘The Romance of the Public Domain’, California Law Review, 92 (5), October, 1331–73<br/><br/>Index<br/> |
