Emory International Law Review

Volume 29Issue 4

Weapons of Mass Construction: The Role of Intellectual Property in Nigeria’s Film and Music Industries

Ana Santos Rutschman | 29 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 673 (2015)

Intellectual property has influenced the recent extraordinary growth of the film and music industries in Nigeria. This growth, largely attributable to the introduction of digital technologies, has also been shaped by an intricate interplay between unbridled piracy and market-induced compliance with IP norms within the same industry. As a signatory of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Nigeria is bound by IP protection standards applicable to both developed and emerging economies. In developing countries, this kind of legal harmonization often translates into a rigid enforcement of IP that risks stifling industrial production. Nigerian film and music industries, however, are thriving by incrementally transitioning from non-proprietary to IP-based regimes. Tracing this evolution, Rutschman contends that a combination of initial levels of low IP protection with progressive “formalization into IP” benefits developing industries that rely on digital production and distribution of content.

Read More »

The Legality of Executive Orders 13628 and 13645: A Bipartite Analysis

Judson Bradley | 29 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 705 (2015)

Judson Bradley argues that recent American sanctions threaten third-party states and innocent Iranians. To comply with international law, the United States should eliminate provisions directly regulating non-U.S. citizens’ conduct outside the United States while simultaneously limiting the scope of prohibited conduct. Under international law, a state’s authority to impose sanctions is correlated to international law’s recognition of sovereignty. But legality is seldom tied to human rights. Bradley connects Executive Orders 13628 and 13645 and human rights concerns. Addressing these Orders, Bradley clarifies the meaning of “sanction” and focuses on the traditional principles establishing jurisdiction¿nationality and territoriality. Because sovereignty and human rights are not mutually exclusive, Bradley argues these Orders are also illegal as over-inclusive. Bradley emphasizes the importance of contemporaneous sovereignty and human rights analyses, and explains why the United Nations is the better positioned to impose sanctions.

Read More »

The Crypto-Currency Conundrum: Regulating an Uncertain Future

Ed Howden | 29 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 741 (2015)

Ed Howden proposes that regulatory bodies, whether international entities or national governments, must delicately undertake the regulation of all cryptos—including bitcoin. Conflicting cryptos rules across borders are not necessarily a recipe for disaster. However, heavy-handed and cumbersome regulation will spark innovation to circumvent these controls and foster the development of new cryptos, reducing demand for the established cryptos and harming the international economy. Howden highlights how past suggestions for reconciling bitcoin to the purview of the International Monetary Fund were flawed. Ultimately, Howden examines ways in which the WTO, despite its flaws, can assert guidance for the crypto-currency industry; and why, given the current global entity structure, WTO regulation is the optimal available approach.

Read More »

UEFA Financial Fairplay Regulations and European Union Antitrust Law Complications

Valerie Kaplan | 29 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 799 (2015)

Financial struggles among European football clubs were far too common in the last decade. Mismanagement and overspending in the Rangers FC forced the club to go into administration and ultimately liquidate in 2012. The Rangers consistently spent more on players than the club’s payroll could afford. The Union of European Football Associations observed the problem and approved Financial Fair Play Regulations (FFP) to fix these financial issues. FFP intends to introduce rationality and stabilize the financial environment of European club football. The structure of FFP makes the regulation illegal under the European Union’s competition law. The predicted effect of FFP on the player market and competition between teams clearly violates EU competition law. Valerie Kaplan explores the manners in which FFP violates EU competition law, and offers a way for UEFA to achieve the objectives of FFP without further violations.

Read More »