The greediest blog on the net.
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Seminar Paper Topic
Today's reading for my seminar is about 95% on point with my paper topic.
The first is a case that I'd largely ignored because of its poor logic and limited applicability.
The second is an amicus brief from Mark Lemley of Boalt that I largely agree with.
The third is a law review article that is more of an overview.
What surprised me was that my analysis was almost spot-on with the second and third readings. I don't know if that resulted from reading a bunch of cases and law review articles on the topic (although not as many as you'd suspect) or just that such analysis is a scene-a-faire (the only way to do it). Either way, I'm even happier with my first draft than I was before these readings.
On a similar note, all three articles criticized Judge Easterbrook's ProCD v. Zeidenberg opinion. I devoted about 4/30 pages of my paper to do the same. Although he is considered a good conservative judge, I disagree with 90% of what Easterbrook's decisions say and hold.
Posted by Gel 2:53 PM Post a Comment
Real Friends' Blogs