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
Instapundit
Baseball Musings
Patently-O
Tim Blair
Volokh
Mark Steyn
Chris Lynch
Donald Luskin
Neal Boortz

Links
UT School of Law
UA ChEE
Jim Rome

Powered by Blogger
Listed on Blogwise