Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts Issues

Volumes 1 - 5 were published under the journal name "Shidler Journal of Law, Commerce + Technology".

Volume 4

Issue 4 Spring 2008


Liability for Consumer Information Security Breaches: Deconstructing FTC Complaints against Businesses Victimized by Consumer Information Security Breaches

abstract   full article

Joel B. Hanson

No Harm No Foul: Limits on Damages Awards for Individuals Subject to a Data Breach

abstract   full article

Derek A. Bishop

To Mine or Not to Mine: Recent Developments in the Legal Ethics Debate Regarding Metadata

abstract   full article

Boris Reznikov

Issue 3 Winter 2008


Copyright Liability for Those Who Provide the Means of Infringement: In light of the RIAA lawsuits, who is at risk for the infringing acts of others?

abstract   full article

Karen Horowitz

Data Privacy and Breach Reporting: Compliance with Varying State Laws


abstract   full article

G. Martin Bingisser

Applying the Americans with Disabilities Act to Private Websites after National Federation of the Blind v. Target

abstract   full article

Jeffrey Bashaw

Issue 2 Autumn 2007


"Can I See Some ID?" Age Verification Requirements for the Online Liquor Store

abstract   full article

Boris Reznikov

Admitting Computer Record Evidence after In Re Vinhnee: A Stricter Standard for the Future?

abstract   full article

Cooper Offenbecher

FRCP 19: A Preferable Alternative to Traditional Judicial Rules for Determining Patent Licensee Standing


In Aspex Eyewear v. Miracle Optics, a patent infringement claim was initially dismissed because the court found that the parties bringing suit, a patentee and a patent sub-licensee, lacked standing because although the patentee had given all substantial rights to a licensee, the sub-licensee’s license did not convey “all substantial rights.” Thus, neither party had “all substantial rights,” the traditional threshold test for patent licensee standing. While the Federal Circuit ultimately reversed and allowed the suit to go forward, the case demonstrates how the current patent standing rule only magnifies the expense of litigating an infringement suit by requiring additional resources for debating “all substantial rights.” This Article analyzes the current standing rules for licensees of intellectual property under the various federal intellectual property statutes. In general, exclusive licensees have standing to sue, either alone or by joining the licensor. Although the fundamental motivation for this rule is sound, the rule can be unnecessarily rigid as applied and can prevent licensing arrangements from reflecting the intent of the parties. This article will also analyze FRCP 19’s approach, which provides a more flexible and predictable rule.

full article

Jeffrey Bashaw

Issue 1 Summer 2007


Employee Internet Misuse: How Failing to Investigate Pornography May Lead To Tort Liability

abstract   full article

Jamila Johnson

Don't Bet on it: How Complying with Federal Internet Gambling Law is not Enough


abstract   full article

Jennifer W. Chiang

Reach Out and Text Someone: How Text Message Spam May Be a Call Under the TCPA

abstract   full article

Daniel L. Hadjinian

Patent Rights Under FOSS Licensing Schemes

abstract   full article

Shaobin Zhu

Connect with us:

© Copyright 2015, All Rights Reserved University of Washington School of Law

4293 Memorial Way Northeast, Seattle, WA 98195