Greedy Blog

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
Random Rantings
Fancy Dirt
Force Paintball

Locations of visitors to this page

Other Blogs
Baseball Musings
Tim Blair
Mark Steyn
Chris Lynch
Donald Luskin
Neal Boortz

UT School of Law
Jim Rome

Powered by Blogger
Listed on Blogwise