ILNews

IU Maurer partners with Oxford for new program

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana University Maurer School of Law has signed an agreement with the Oxford Internet Institute, a department of the University of Oxford, creating a new program that will allow students to earn a certification in information law and policy from the British university and a Master of Laws degree from IU Maurer School of Law.

Aimed primarily at international students, the new program will give students with an American law degree or non-U.S. equivalency the opportunity to take 14 to 16 credit hours of existing regular law courses in the broad area of information and intellectual property law.

Students admitted to the program will spend the fall semester in Bloomington and the spring term at Oxford, where they will take specialized courses and complete a 10,000-word thesis. The thesis provides students the opportunity to apply the methods and approaches covered during their coursework and carry out a substantive piece of academic research on an information law and policy-related topic of their choice.

Students who complete 24 credit hours from IU or the equivalent and an acceptable thesis will receive a Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree from the IU Maurer School of Law and a Certificate in Information Law and Policy from the OII.

A faculty member from the Bloomington law school will spend most, if not all, of the spring semester in Oxford overseeing the students' work. Students are expected to complete the program within one year.  

Distinguished Professor Fred H. Cate, who directs IU’s Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research, and Oxford’s Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, professor of Internet governance and regulation, will lead the program, which has an initial term of three years beginning in the fall of 2012.

In 2001, the University of Oxford founded the OII as a department for the study of the societal implications of the Internet. The Institute's faculty members are engaged in a variety of research projects covering social, economic, political, legal, technical and ethical issues of the Internet in everyday life.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT