This book deals comprehensively with the major treaties and conventions covering the law of international copyright and neighbouring rights. It explains the complex legal, economic and political background to the treaties and their contents, and how they inter-relate. There is also practical commercial discussion of how copyright and neighbouring rights are treated in international trade measures such as GATT, WTO, NAFTA, and bilateral and unilateral treaties, with a section devoted to how unilateral trade measures are applied by the USA in particular. There is also some discussion of how international copyright law and neighbouring rights may develop in the future.
The book is intended to be a definitive account of the law of international copyright and neighbouring rights, but it is also intended to be accessible to non-specialist practitioners. It is fully cross-referenced to a forthcoming companion volume, European Copyright Law and Policy (expected to publish in 2008), offering readers a comprehensive approach to the subject. The author has been consulted on copyright policy on numerous occasions by various governmental and non-governmental organisations within and outside the EC, and therefore is ideally placed to give an inside view on how policy is formed.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Friday, March 7, 2008
This book offers a juristic exposition and analysis of diplomatic protection as an institution of public international law. Diplomatic protection is primarily exercised by States towards their nationals, and exceptionally non-nationals, against violations of international law by other States, and is one of the oldest traditions of international law.
The book starts with a history of the subject, and charts the development of diplomatic protection conceived as an institution of international law. It goes on to discuss the violations of international law which can trigger diplomatic protection, arrangements which are excluded from this type of protection, conflicts of interests underlying the principle and how these can be resolved, and the influence of human rights on the area. Subsequent chapters look at attempts to codify the law of diplomatic protection, and offer a critical examination of this in the light of modern policy considerations, and the recent work of the International Law Commission. The book concludes with an assessment of recent changes in the law and the importance of these from the point of view of the individual.
The judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide (Bosnia-Herzegovina v. Serbia, hereinafter Bosnian Genocide), issued on 26 February 2007, has already become the source of considerable controversy, which can be attributed, in part, to the mixed nature of the outcome.
While it was the first ICJ judgment in history to pronounce that genocide had been committed, it exonerated Serbia from direct responsibility for the genocide in Srebrenica (holding, instead, that it 'merely' failed to prevent genocide).
This short note suggests the outcome of the case may represent an attempt by the Court to promote conciliatory or transactional justice and to partly satisfy the interests of all parties to the case. Although international judges often deny that they resort to such judicial calculations, there is little doubt in my mind that considerations relating to the acceptability of the judgment are factored in the judicial process. Moreover, from a normative perspective, such considerations probably represent under current international conditions a "lesser evil". Still, acknowledging the inevitability of "judicial politics" does not solve the serious problems associated with this practice.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Farer: Confronting Global Terrorism and American Neo-Conservatism: The Framework of a Liberal Grand Strategy
This book brings together and subjects to critical scrutiny the core controversies connected to the so-called "War on Terror": When is it legitimate and prudent to use force? Is torture ever justified? Do we need to suspend human rights in order to fight terrorism? Is multi-culturalism the answer to communal conflict? Is Israel's treatment of the Palestinians illegal and immoral, an accelerator of terrorism, or legitimately defensive and largely irrelevant to the terrorism problem? Are terrorists responding to concrete U.S. policies or do they simply hate and wish to destroy Western societies?
Liberal intellectuals and political leaders have been slow to articulate a grand strategy informed by liberal values for confronting these issues surrounding global terrorism. The book outlines the framework of a liberal strategy, and exposes the costs of the neo-conservative alternative that has driven US foreign policy since 9/11.
This book outlines the principles behind the international law of foreign investment. The main focus is on the law governed by bilateral and multilateral investment treaties. The book traces the purpose, context and evolution of the clauses and provisions characteristic of contemporary investment treaties, and analyses the case law interpreting the issues raised by standard clauses. Particular consideration is given to broad treaty-rules whose understanding in practice has mainly been shaped by their interpretation and application by international tribunals. In addition, the book introduces the dispute settlement mechanisms for enforcing investment law, outlining the operation of State vs. State and Investor vs. State arbitration.
Combining a systematic analytical study of the texts and principles underlying investment law with a jurisprudential analysis of the case law arising in international tribunals, this book offers an ideal introduction to the principles of international investment law and arbitration, for students or practitioners new to the field.
Shaheed Fatima (Blackstone Chambers) will give a talk today at the University of Cambridge Lauterpacht Centre for International Law on "The House of Lords Decision in Al Jedda: The Security Council and State Responsibility for Internment."
Giorgio Gaja (Univ. of Florence - Law & Member, International Law Commission) will give a talk today at the University of Oxford Public International Law Discussion Group on "Impermissible Reservations Revisited: A View from the International Law Commission."
Robert Howse (Univ. of Michigan - Law) will give a talk today at the New York University School of Law Institute for International Law and Justice International Legal Theory Colloquium on "Beyond Compliance: Rethinking Why International Law Really Matters" (paper co-authored with Ruti Teitel).
Paul Roberts (Univ. of Nottingham - Law) will give a talk today at Queen's University Belfast School of Law on "Discipline, Taxonomy and Method: Seven Concentric Circles of International Criminal Justice." The talk is co-sponsored with the International Law Association - British Branch.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
- Reto Malacrida, Towards Sounder and Fairer WTO Retaliation: Suggestions for Possible Additional Procedural Rules Governing Members' Preparation and Adoption of Retaliatory Measures
- Doaa Abdel Motaal, The Biofuels Landscape: Is There a Role for the WTO?
- James Scott, The Use and Misuse of Trade Negotiation Simulations
- Bernadette Andreosso-O'Callaghan & Françoise Nicolas, What Scope for an EL-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement?
- Louise Curran, Forecasting the Trade Outcomes of Liberalization in a Quota Context - What Do We Learn From Changes in Textiles Trade After the ATC?
- Gijs Berends, Fear and Loading in West Bank/Gaza: The State of Palestinian Trade
- Chad P. Bourn & Bernard M. Hoeckman, Developing Countries and Enforcement of Trade Agreements: Why Dispute Settlement is Not Enough
- Jan Wouters & Bart De Meester, The UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity and WTO Law: A Case Study in Fragmentation of International Law
- James Thuo Gathii, Foreword to Special Issue on the Third World and International Law
- David Kennedy, The TWAIL Conference: Keynote Address Albany, New York, April 2007
- Dianne Otto, The Gastronomics of TWAIL's Feminist Flavourings: Some Lunch-Time Offerings
- Gustavo Gozzi, History of International Law and Western Civilization
- Jackson Nyamuya Maogoto, The "Good Governance" Crusade in the Third World: A Rich, Complex Narrative Magic Wand or Smoke Screen?
- Daniel Wanjau Muriu, The Imperial Emancipatory Paradox of International Human Rights: How Useful is the Right to Health in Sub-Saharan Africa?
- Usha Natarajan, A Third World Approach to Debating the Legality of the Iraq War
- Ibironke T. Odumosu, Locating Third World Resistance in the International Law on Foreign Investment
- Kithure Kindiki, International Law on Trial: The Darfur Crisis and the Responsibility to Protect Civilians
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
In the past few years, arguments involving international law have increasingly been put before the English courts and a number of recent decisions have put into question traditional views as to the place of international law in the English legal system. The 17th SLS international law section/BIICL conference will examine various issues arising out of the new jurisprudence.
Panels will cover the legal effects of unincorporated treaties and other international instruments (including Security Council resolutions); customary international law and English law; non-justiciability and act of State; and the relationships between human rights, international criminal law and State immunity in English law.
This book analyzes a new phenomenon in international law: international organizations assuming the powers of a national government in order to reform political institutions. After reviewing the history of internationalized territories, this book asks two questions about these ‘humanitarian occupations’. First, why did they occur? The book argues that the missions were part of a larger trend in international law to maintain existing states and their populations. The only way this could occur in these territories, which had all seen violent internal conflict, was for international administrators to take charge. Second, what is the legal justification for the missions? The book examines each of the existing justifications and finds them wanting. A new foundation is needed, one that takes account of the missions’ authorisation by the UN Security Council and their pursuit of goals widely supported in the international community.
In Defending Humanity, internationally acclaimed legal scholar George P. Fletcher and Jens David Ohlin, a leading expert on international criminal law, tackle one of the most important and controversial questions of our time: When is war justified? When a nation is attacked, few would deny that it has the right to respond with force. But what about preemptive and preventive wars, or crossing another state's border to stop genocide? Was Israel justified in initiating the Six Day War, and was NATO's intervention in Kosovo legal? What about the U.S. invasion of Iraq?
In their provocative new book, Fletcher and Ohlin offer a groundbreaking theory on the legality of war with clear guidelines for evaluating these interventions. The authors argue that much of the confusion on the subject stems from a persistent misunderstanding of the United Nations Charter. The Charter appears to be very clear on the use of military force: it is only allowed when authorized by the Security Council or in self-defense. Unfortunately, this has led to the problem of justifying force when the Security Council refuses to act or when self-defense is thought not to apply - and to the difficult dilemma of declaring such interventions illegal or ignoring the UN Charter altogether.
Call for Papers: International Conference on Corporate Social Responsibility, Business Responsibilities for Human Rights, and International Law
The overall topic of this conference will be the possible directions of the future interrelationship between CSR, Business Responsibilities for Human Rights, and regulatory approaches under and/or informed by international law. The Final Report of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General on Human Rights and Business (SRSG, Professor John Ruggie), currently expected to be submitted to the UN Human Rights Commission in June 2008, will form a point of departure, with the understanding that the Report and the extensive consultative process leading to it provide a detailed and well researched basis and recommendations for future approaches but that these may also be open to discussion. It is understood that CSR and Business Responsibilities for Human Rights are not necessarily the same, but that the two influence each other in several ways.
The conference is an opportunity for researchers and practitioners within law and business to get together and share views on the future directions, challenges and potential of the voluntary or mandatory character of CSR and Business Responsibilities for Human Rights, and international law as a possible avenue for informing and regulating both. The conference is a two day conference and will include plenary sessions as well as thematic track sessions.
Topics to be addressed during the conference will include:
- CSR as an emerging topic of legal relevance
- The recommendations of the SRSG: Implications and role for international law and intergovernmental regulatory initiatives
- CSR and regulation of business responsibilities for human rights: challenges and potential facing legal theory and practice
- CSR and regulation of business responsibilities for human rights: challenges and potential for management theory and practice
- Global legitimacy: Challenges facing the future direction of CSR and business responsibilities for human rights
- CSR, business responsibilities for human rights, and liability issues: challenges and potential for management and legal advisers
- Past international (UN, EU, others . . .) and non-state (corporate, NGO, others . . .) initiatives on regulating CSR and business responsibilities for human rights: Lessons and inspiration for the future
- CSR, public procurement and public policy: Challenges and potential for future legal regulation and management
- Corporate Governance and CSR: Challenges and potential for future legal regulation and management
- CSR schemes and accountability: Regulatory and management aspects
- Policy as soft regulation? CSR and business responsibilities for human rights in international trade and development policies?
Abstracts for papers addressing the topics set out above are invited by this call. Abstracts should be 200-300 words. They should be sent to Karin Buhmann, Associate Professor, Institute of Food and Resource Economics, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org no later than 1 May 2008. Submitted abstracts for papers will be reviewed for acceptance by a group comprising researchers from the organising institutions. Response on whether abstracts are accepted will be sent to submitters by mid-June 2008. Final papers (8,000-12,000 words including footnotes and references) should be submitted by 20 September 2008.
Decisions regarding the fora in which the papers will be presented - either plenary sessions or parallel workshops - will be made after the conference organisers have received the abstracts and selected the papers that may be presented at the conference.
The conference language will be English. Papers should be in English. Abstracts for papers may be submitted in English or in a Scandinavian language.The organisers of the conference are negotiating with international publishers regarding the publication of the conference papers in an anthology. Whereas papers accepted for presentation at the conference will be accepted on the basis of abstracts, acceptance for publication will depend on the quality of the final and complete paper.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Rules are no longer merely made by states, but increasingly by international organizations and other international bodies. At the same time these rules do impact the daily life of citizens and companies as it has become increasingly difficult to draw dividing lines between international, EU and domestic law. This book introduces the notion of ‘multilevel regulation’ as a way to study these normative processes and the interplay between different legal orders. It indicates that many rules in such areas as trade, financial cooperation, food safety, pharmaceuticals, security, terrorism, civil aviation, environmental protection or the internet find their origin in international cooperation. Apart from mapping multilevel regulation on the basis of a number of case studies, the book analyses its consequences in relation to forms of legal protection and legitimacy. In that respect it proposes an agenda for research to study how to cope with multilevel regulation.
This book offers valuable resources for researchers involved in studying the interplay between international, European and domestic law. For practitioners it offers background information on the ways in which many international rules come into being.
- Jan Wouters, Ramses Wessel, & Andreas Follesdal, Multilevel Regulation and the EU: A Brief Introduction
- Ramses Wessel & Jan Wouters, The Phenomenon of Multilevel Regulation: Interactions between Global, EU and National Regulatory Spheres
- Bärbel R. Dorbeck-Jung, Challenges to the Legitimacy of International Regulation: The Case of Pharmaceuticals Standardisation
- Caroline Bradley, Financial Trade Associations and Multilevel Regulation
- Bart De Meester, Multilevel Banking Regulation: An Assessment of the Role of the EC in the Light of Coherence and Democratic Legitimacy
- Robert Uerpmann-Wittzack, Multilevel Internet Governance Involving the European Union, Nation States and NGOs
- Erling Johannes Husabø, The Interaction between Global, Regional and National Regulation in the Definition of Terrorism
- Mirjam Kars & Helen Stout, The Transatlantic Common Aviation Area: Competing Legal Orders and State Self-Interest
- Rory Stephen Brown, How Do Judges Cope with Multilevel Regulation?
- Clemens A. Feinäugle, Legal Protection of the Individual Against UN Sanctions in a Multilevel System
- Christina Eckes, Trapped between Courts or How Terrorist Suspects Lost Their Right to a Remedy
- Mielle Bulterman, Multilevel Economic Regulation and the EC Protection of Fundamental Rights
- Andrea Keessen, Reducing the Judicial Deficit in Multilevel Environmental Regulation: The Example of Plant Protection Products
- Andrea Ott, Multilevel Regulations Reviewed by Multilevel Jurisdictions: The ECJ, the National Courts and the ECtHR
- Nikolaos Lavranos, Hierarchy in Multilevel Regulation
- Andreas Follesdal, Epilogue: Toward More Legitimate Multilevel Regulation
American laws increasingly regulate the conduct of foreigners abroad. The growth in extraterritorial laws, in no small part, can be traced to the effects test - a doctrine that instructs courts to presume that Congress intended to regulate extraterritorially when foreign conduct is found to have a substantial effect within the United States. For many scholars and lawyers, the effects test is the doctrinal lynchpin for determining the geographic reach of domestic laws. Territorial limits on legislative jurisdiction, on the other hand, are seen as anachronistic; a remnant of a pre-modern, pre-globalized world.
This article takes a different, more skeptical view of the effects test. The article argues that many scholars have failed to appreciate the effects test's shortcomings, and the problems that extraterritorial laws create. Rather than place meaningful limits on legislative jurisdiction, the effects test has created confusion and inconsistency, while dramatically increasing the number of laws applied extraterritorially. Contrary to now conventional wisdom, courts would be wise to reembrace territorial limits to legislative jurisdiction. Domestic laws that regulate extraterritorially not only undermine international harmony and are inherently undemocratic, but also threaten long-term American interests. In a globalized world, where territorial borders play a less important role, territorial limits have become ever more important as a necessary constraint to legislative action and as a way to protect not foreign, but American interests. The article concludes that the effects test is best understood as a narrow limit on Congressional power, not as a doctrinal command that reverses the presumption against extraterritoriality. In short, academics have unwisely given the effects test center stage in legislative jurisdiction doctrine, yet it should be no more than a Fifth Business - a minor character, playing merely a supporting role.
Jonathan Zittrain (Univ. of Oxford) will give a talk today at the University of Oxford Department of Politics and International Relations Lecture Series on Foundations of Governance in a Globalized World on "Network Governance and the Internet."
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Death and destruction are unavoidable effects of war and combat situations. The fact that people have been killed or injured or property has been destroyed should not encourage anyone to rush to the conclusion that war crimes have been committed. On the contrary, before reaching such a conclusion, it is necessary to carefully analyze the conduct of the person causing death, injury or damage in order to ascertain whether such conduct is consistent with international humanitarian law.
Technology, law and public opinion on what is acceptable has greatly evolved since World War II. The issue of civilian damage caused in combat operations has become an important topic in public opinion since Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Public pressure to limit incidental civilian damage has notably increased following the NATO aerial campaign in Kosovo in 1999 and the subsequent conflicts in Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003 and Lebanon 2006.
Unlawful Attacks in Combat Situations focuses on the manner in which unlawful attacks launched during the conduct of hostilities have been dealt with in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the international treaty which, to date, deals most comprehensively with war crimes committed in international and non-international armed conflicts, and in the case law of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the first international judicial body that has investigated and prosecuted crimes committed during the conduct of hostilities since World War II.