ILNews

Law School Briefs - 9/14/11

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Law School Briefs

Law School Briefs is Indiana Lawyer’s section highlighting news from law schools in Indiana. While IL has always covered law school news and continues to keep up with law school websites and press releases for updates, we gladly accept submissions for this section from law students, professors, alumni, and others who want to share law school-related news. If you’d like to submit news or a photo from an event, please send it to Jenny Montgomery at jmontgomery@ibj.com, along with contact information for any follow-up questions at least two weeks in advance of the issue date.

IU biomedical conference

Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis has planned its inaugural Biomedical and Health Industry Law Compliance Conference for Sept. 21. The keynote speaker is Joyce R. Branda, director of the Fraud Section of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Commercial Litigation Branch. Branda oversees civil fraud matters and federal litigation under the False Claims Act and other laws.

Topics on the agenda include health care reform, health care-life sciences business relationships, and HIPAA privacy.

The fee to attend – $50 for government attorneys and $100 for private attorneys – covers six hours of CLE, lunch, and refreshments. Attorneys not interested in pursuing CLE may register for $50. Up to 10 students will be allowed to attend, on a first-come, first-served basis. For more information, contact Carsandra Knight at 317-274-1912 or at calknigh@iupui.edu. Additional information is available on the “upcoming events” page of the school’s website at http://indylaw.indiana.edu/news.

IP colloquium

Four scholars from around the globe will visit the Indiana University Maurer School of Law this fall to share their recent work during the Center for Intellectual Property Research IP Colloquium.

Titled “Protecting Intellectual Property: A Global Perspective,” the colloquium will focus on recent developments in IP law in the United States and other countries. The following people are scheduled to speak:

On Sept. 8, Mira Sundara Rajan, an independent scholar and IP consultant and honorary member of Oxford University Magdalen College, spoke on the subject: “Authors or Auteurs? Moral Rights in Film.”

Carys Craig of York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School will present “Copyright, Communication, and IP Culture: Towards a Relational Theory of Copyright Law” on Sept 28.

Pierre-Emmanuel Moyse, McGill University Faculty of Law, will address “Intellectual Property Rights and ‘Abuse of Rights’ Theory, a Jurisprudential Inquiry” on Oct. 13.

Peter Yu, Drake University Law School, will discuss “The Graduated Response” on Oct. 27.

Daniel Gervais, Vanderbilt Law School, will talk about “The Changing Landscape of Collective Rights Management” on Nov. 3.

All talks are scheduled to begin at 1:30 p.m. and end at 3:25 p.m. in Room 213 of the Maurer School of Law. Indiana continuing legal education credit has been applied for. The public is welcome, and more information about the colloquium and the Center for Intellectual Property Research can be found on the center’s website: http://ip.law.indiana.edu/.•

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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT