Volume 11.

Masthead

The Journal's 2015 volume was lead by Editor-in-Chief Kenneth Hsu and his team. We invite you to explore the content; then contribute to the conversation. Submit a response, report a development, or pen the next article.

 
 

11.1

Published in Winter 2015. The first article examines the effectiveness of state and local governments’ use of economic incentive programs following the United States’ recession of 2007-2009. The second article explores two United States Supreme Court cases that expanded the rights of for-profit corporations to engage in activities rooted in First Amendment freedoms that traditionally belonged only to individuals or groups of people. The article examines how corporate leaders exercise these rights, especially in the realm of political contributions, and how the law governs the rights of other stakeholders who are affected by their decisions. The first student note analyzes the effects of patent trolls on startup companies, innovation, and entrepreneurship. The second student note examines how legal technology companies can disrupt the legal marketplace by lowering cost and increasing the sophistication of software to produce legal work on par with that of a lawyer’s work. The third student note explores how privacy law in the U.S. can be improved by referring to the European Union’s recently-enacted legislation that aims to prevent data breaches as a guide. Finally, papers that were presented at the 2013 Symposium on Corporate Governance in Japan provide an overview of recent trends and developments in corporate governance and Japanese law.

More detailed summaries below, as well as links to respond. What will you contribute? Responses will be published in our online pocket part on a rolling basis. 

 

11.2

Published in Summer 2015. The first article explores treaty shopping by analyzing what has been done about this practice and what can be done to either prevent or reduce it. The second article discusses shareholder activism and recommends that companies evaluate director nominee compensation plans on a case-by-case basis, rather than simply dismissing the idea. The first student note examines contributory counterfeiting in online marketplaces and suggests that these platforms should be required to more actively combat counterfeiting on their sites. The second student note discusses voluntary sustainability reporting and the need for a uniform reporting standard to enforce company accountability. Finally, the third student note explores the broad statutory language of the “Delaware carve-out” and the lack of clear circuit court consensus in an attempt to bring some clarity to the statute.

More detailed summaries below, as well as links to respond. What will you contribute? Responses will be published in our online pocket part on a rolling basis.