Scientific and technological innovations are forcing the inadequacies of patent law into the spotlight. Robin Feldman explains why patents are causing so much trouble. She urges lawmakers to focus on crafting rules that anticipate future bargaining, not on the impossible task of assigning precise boundaries to rights when an invention is new.

"This book focuses on a very timely and important subject that merit s comprehensive analysis: "rethinking" the securities laws, with particular emphasis on the Securities Act and Securities Exchange Act. The system of securities regulation that prevails today in the United States is one that has been formed through piecemeal federal legislation, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in vocation of its administrative authority, and self-regulatory episodic action. As a consequence, the presence of consistent and logical regulation all too often is lacking. In both transactional and litigation settings, with frequency, mandates apply that are erratic and antithetical to sound public policy. Over four decades ago, the American Law Institute (ALI) adopted the ALI Federal Securities Code. The Code has not been enacted by Congress and its prospects are dim. Since that time, no treatise, monograph, or other source comprehensively has focused on this meritorious subject. The objective of this book is to identify the deficiencies that exist under the current regimen, address their failings, provide recommendations for rectifying these deficiencies, and set forth a thorough analysis for remediation in order to prescribe a consistent and sound securities law framework. By undertaking this challenge, the book provides an original and valuable resource for effectuating necessary law reform that should prove beneficial to the integrity of the U.S. capital markets, effective and fair government and private enforcement, and the enhancement of investor protection"--

Written by a former dean, this book offers a unique understanding of challenges facing legal education, research, publishing and governance.

Some of today’s top legal thinkers consider the ways that legal thinking has bolstered—rather than corrected—injustice. Bringing together some of today’s top legal thinkers, this volume reimagines law in the twenty-first century, zeroing in on the most vibrant debates among legal scholars today. Going beyond constitutional jurisprudence as conventionally understood, contributors show the ways in which legal thinking has bolstered rather than corrected injustice. If conservative approaches have been well served by court-centered change, contributors to Rethinking Law consider how progressive ones might rely on movement-centered, legislative, and institutional change. In other words, they believe that the problems we face today are vastly bigger than can be addressed by litigation. The courts still matter, of course, but they should be less central to questions about social justice. Contributors describe how constitutional law supported a system of economic inequality; how we might rethink the First Amendment in the age of the internet; how deeply racial bias is embedded in our laws; and what kinds of changes are necessary. They ask which is more important: the laws or how they are enforced? Rethinking Law considers these questions with an eye toward a legal system that truly supports a just society. Contributors include Jedediah Purdy, David Grewal, Jamal Greene, Reva Siegel, Jocelyn Simonson, Aziz Rana

In an ere as morally confused as ours, Stoner argues, we at least ought to know what we've abandoned or suppressed in the name of judicial activism and the modern rights-oriented Constitution. Having lost our way, perhaps the common law, in its original sense, provides a way back, a viable alternative to the debilitating relativism of our current age.

This book demonstrates how legal realism offers important and unique jurisprudential insights that are not just a part of legal history, but are also relevant and useful for a contemporary understanding of legal theory.

Recent U.S. elections have defied nationwide majority preference at the White House, Senate, and House levels. This work of interdisciplinary scholarship explains how “winner-take-all” and single-member district elections make this happen, and what can be done to repair the system. Proposed reforms include the National Popular Vote interstate compact (presidential elections); eliminating the Senate filibuster; and proportional representation using Ranked Choice Voting for House, state, and local elections.