Law in Contemporary Society

View   r4  >  r3  >  r2  >  r1
SarahKimFirstEssay 4 - 27 May 2022 - Main.MorganMartin
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"
Line: 31 to 31
 Clearly, I don’t have the answer, both for myself (yet) and the world. I am still in the process of thinking and trying to reconcile. Professor Moglen framed the question for me well – is it possible to go to work as an IP lawyer and keep my conscience? He says yes, but given how vividly I remember the defeated way in which I walked out of his office after having this conversation, maybe deep inside I think no. Regardless of my answer now, I hope the next 10 weeks of work will begin to guide me in the direction that is right for me.

Added:
>
>
Hi Sarah,

I found your topic to be super interesting. I was not familiar with the Oyster Project and had not yet had exposure to patent law or the types or arguments against it. I was particularly intrigued by the analysis that stated that patents came out around the same time as a police force. While that comparison is riveting, I am still not convinced that all things should be without a patent. Part of living in our society is an sense of individualism and freedom. With this individualism, comes the ability make money from for our name, image, and likeness and our ideas. Because of this, I do believe people should be able to patent their ideas and be rewarded for their innovation and creativity. However, I do think there should possibly be a time limit on the patent and easy rules for others to access and use the idea at some point. This will benefit society as a whole. The comparison to past institutions is interesting because I think those institutions (prisons & police) for example present different sets of issues surrounding life & death. So to me the comparison is not entirely the same. I look forward to learning more about patent law based off your writings- Morgan

 
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.

SarahKimFirstEssay 3 - 27 May 2022 - Main.SarahKim
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"
Line: 6 to 6
 -- By SarahKim - 11 Mar 2022
Changed:
<
<
A few weeks ago, I went out to dinner with a couple law school friends: we were determined not to let out a peep about law school, landlord-tenant law, or contributory negligence – all of which had pretty much been consuming our lives. It was through this conscious effort to steer the conversation away from whining and complaining that I first learned of the Billion Oyster Project: a non-profit that has been working to restore the once-robust but now-barren oyster reefs across New York City, with the specific goal of restoring 1 billion oysters by 2035. Reading more about this project put a smile on my face – it gave me the tingly, heart-warming feeling that good news does sometimes.
>
>
A few weeks ago, I went out to dinner with a couple law school friends, determined not to let out a peep about law school, landlord-tenant law, or contributory negligence – all of which had been consuming our lives. It was through this conscious effort to steer the conversation away from anything law-related that I first learned of the Billion Oyster Project: a non-profit that has been working to restore the once-robust but now-barren oyster reefs across New York City, with the specific goal of restoring 1 billion oysters by 2035. Reading more about this project put a smile on my face – it gave me the tingly, heart-warming feeling that good news does sometimes.
 
Changed:
<
<

History of Oysters in NYC

>
>

History of Oysters and the Project

 
Changed:
<
<
As Mark Kurlansky, author of The Big Oyster: History on the Half Shell said: “The history of the New York oyster is a history of New York itself—its wealth, its strength, its excitement, its greed, its thoughtfulness, its destructiveness, its blindness, and—as any New Yorker will tell you—its filth.” In the early 17th Century, oysters were far from a luxury in the city. They were so cheap and ubiquitous that they could easily be found bought and sold at cheap eateries, oyster cellars, or even on the streets at all hours. The demand was so high that eventually the oyster population went on a decline, and in 1715, the legislature had to ban harvesting in the city’s oyster reefs in the spring and summer to allow enough time for the ecosystem to replenish every year.
>
>
“The history of the New York oyster is a history of New York itself—its wealth, its strength, its excitement, its greed, its thoughtfulness, its destructiveness, its blindness, and—as any New Yorker will tell you—its filth.” The same oysters that were cheap and ubiquitous in early 17th Century New York soon became so overharvested that the oyster population could not be sustained without regulation in 1715. By the early 20th Century, with urbanization and exponentially-growing Manhattan landfills, New York City was no longer fit for habitation by oysters – in 1927, it closed its last commercial oyster bed.
 
Changed:
<
<
By the early 20th century, with urbanization and exponentially-growing Manhattan landfills, oyster beds in the city suffered degradation by over-harvesting, sewage pollution, and toxicity in the Hudson River. New York Harbor began to build a reputation for its filth and disease, and the oysters from the harbor became inedible. Oysters were no longer cheap foods of widespread consumption; New York City was no longer an “oyster capital.” In 1927, the city closed its last commercial oyster bed in Raritan Bay.

What the Project Does

The Billion Oyster Project was founded by Murray Fisher and Pete Malinowski; both worked at the Urban Assembly New York Harbor School as a director and aquaculture instructor, respectively. The two recognized the communal and environmental benefits of bringing oyster reefs back to New York Harbor. Water quality in the city began to steadily improve after the Clean Water Act of 1972, and now, despite still being polluted and unsanitary, New York Harbor is deemed clean enough for oyster reefs and other similar ecosystems to survive. Such a large-scale revival, however, is not one that can be undertaken by just two passionate advocates. Fisher and Malinowski thus adopted a unique approach to the Billion Oyster Project: to focus on education and outreach to get the community—ranging from students to volunteers to local restaurants—engaged in the ongoing effort to restore oyster beds in New York City.

A huge benefit of this approach is that it raises local awareness about the benefits of oyster reefs unknown to many. Aside from being a greatly loved source of food for the people in the city, oysters also serve as the foundation for the growth of many other species and marine wildlife. They are also essential for further improvements in the quality of water sources around the city – a single oyster can filter up to 50 gallons of water a day. Finally, large oyster reef ecosystems can act as natural storm barriers by softening the damage caused by large waves, as well as preventing flooding and erosion.

Since its founding, the Billion Oyster Project has restored 75 million oysters in the New York Harbor area. Oysters, and the project, are now symbols of resilience for the city: “a rare hopeful sign amid ominous news about New York waterways in the age of rapid climate change.” While it is true that the restored reefs are not safe to eat from for at least another few decades (or even centuries), the hope is that the project will carry on for generations to eventually bring vibrant marine life, cheap oyster eateries, and clean water back to New York City.

>
>
The Clean Water Act of 1972 did its job, and now, despite still being polluted and unsanitary, New York Harbor is finally deemed clean enough for oyster reefs and other similar ecosystems to survive. The Billion Oyster Project was founded by Murray Fisher and Pete Malinowski, who recognized the communal and environmental benefits of bringing oyster reefs back to New York Harbor – oysters filter water, protect against flooding or erosion, and serve as the foundation for the growth of many other species and marine wildlife. The founders focus on education and outreach to get students, volunteers, and local restaurants engaged in the effort. Since its founding, the Project has restored 75 million oysters in the New York Harbor area. They are not yet safe to eat from (and won’t be for a while), but the hope is that the project will carry on for generations to eventually bring vibrant marine life, cheap oyster eateries, and clean water back to New York City.
 

What Does This Mean For Me?

Changed:
<
<
What started as an active avoidance of a discussion of the doom that is law school ironically got me thinking more about it. I thought about why hearing about the Billion Oyster Project particularly resonated with me, why I found it to be so much of a heart-warming and happy story. Was it the community? Sure, it’s nice to see local business owners and students and residents all working toward an environmental cause. Was it the morality of the work? Maybe, it’s always nice to hear something good in the midst of terrible, troubling things going on in the world.
>
>
What started as an active avoidance of a discussion of the doom that is law school ironically got me thinking more about it. Why did hearing about the Billion Oyster Project particularly resonate with me? Why did I find it to be so much of a heart-warming and happy story?

Perhaps it’s the gut feeling that collective management of natural resources commons is good and monopoly is bad. Reconciling this instinct with my interest in intellectual property was a goal I set for myself even as early as when that interest first sparked. IP (or more generally, the intersection between science and the law) is what excites and fascinates me. It’s exactly what I was looking for when I walked out of the last day of my chemistry lab, wanting never to step in a wet lab ever again but hoping, still, to study and apply science. And I feel lucky to have found such source of intellectual stimulation quite early on in my life.

 
Changed:
<
<
But I think what struck me most was the fact that so many people were working so vigorously for a large-scale project whose effects they probably will not even live to see. The oysters being brought to New York Harbor now won’t be edible within my lifetime. Restoration of marine life, clean (enough) water in the Hudson, and reversal of erosion all take time and patience to manifest, as do many other environmental changes.
>
>
But the inherent flaws in the patent system are overt. No one needs to convince me that the manmade concept of a patent is often used for large corporations and institutions to gang up against the little guy, to steal credit for the work done by individuals, and to claim infinite “ownership” over an “invention” by making nothing more than minor adjustments. After all, it’s not too far from home that all of these abuses can be witnessed.
 
Changed:
<
<
I’ve always thought of myself as a result-oriented person. I’ve found tangible representations of my work product to be one of the biggest motivating factors – which is why I’m interested in IP, as there’s almost always going to be a patent or product that I can visualize. But the law doesn’t always work that way. Of course, I’ll see immediate results for the clients I work for. The more important changes, though – the systematic changes I hope to see in the world – won’t be immediate. To me, the Billion Oyster Project symbolizes the need for good work, even if the product of that work doesn’t manifest until much later.
>
>

Abolishing the System

 
Changed:
<
<
I think this is a fine first draft. It gets out the material and gives us wonderful ways to think about it. One needed improvement is substantial tightening of the backstory. You have good sources and they're already linked so the reader can find out as much as she wants with two clicks. Therefore all you need is capsule summaries, barely more than 100 words.
>
>
Only after coming to law school did I encounter serious discourse on abolishing the patent system – through multiple professors, through the writing of Boldrin and Levine, and more. It seems like each person has his own specific take on it, but they all share the same sentiment: that knowledge should be free, accessible, and uncorrupt. And that the patent system’s stated mission of “incentivizing and protecting innovation” is a hoax – empirically, stronger patent systems have actually stifled innovation and kicked new players out of the market.
 
Changed:
<
<
The space made will allow you to write about your real question: why does the restoration of our shellfish commons make you feel good, and why should that matter to someone thinking about IP practice? Oysters are the biological intersection of fisheries and groundwater, two of the great examples of natural resources commons. One possibility is that you are experiencing the discovery that managing commons makes human beings feel good and monopoly makes them feel bad. The first woman to win a Nobel Prize in Economics, Elinor Ostrom, was the greatest thinker about commons in the 20th century. You might be interested in a little cartoon made by her Prize Trust. Because I am in the cartoon you can understand the relationship of Ellie's work to what I did in free software, and also why it makes me smile, as it makes me smile to think that I helped to destroy the world's most profitable pharmaceutical patent in 2006, costing Pfizer $84 billion and its CEO his job, among other such acts of intellectual anti-property.
>
>
At first this struck me as radical and unrealistic. I thought that so long as the patent system provided enough of an incentive for people to conduct research and innovate, it could never go away. I couldn’t imagine a single politician advocating for its destruction given the high stakes – namely, large corporations’ interests in maintaining a monopoly. But the more I thought about it, the more the idea grew on me. In particular, one thing Chris Morten said stuck with me: the patent system came into existence around the same time the first police force was established. Of course, the two are very different systems, each with its own distinct set of issues; the point is that the two institutions were formed at similar times, and are now similarly riddled with corruption and abuse. And yet we see many more people advocating for the abolishment of one than for the other.
 
Changed:
<
<
Perhaps, just perhaps, those billion oysters are telling you that you too will be happier as an anti-IP lawyer, for commons and against government monopolies on ideas, after all.
>
>
Clearly, I don’t have the answer, both for myself (yet) and the world. I am still in the process of thinking and trying to reconcile. Professor Moglen framed the question for me well – is it possible to go to work as an IP lawyer and keep my conscience? He says yes, but given how vividly I remember the defeated way in which I walked out of his office after having this conversation, maybe deep inside I think no. Regardless of my answer now, I hope the next 10 weeks of work will begin to guide me in the direction that is right for me.
 
Deleted:
<
<
 



SarahKimFirstEssay 2 - 19 Mar 2022 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"
Line: 30 to 30
 I’ve always thought of myself as a result-oriented person. I’ve found tangible representations of my work product to be one of the biggest motivating factors – which is why I’m interested in IP, as there’s almost always going to be a patent or product that I can visualize. But the law doesn’t always work that way. Of course, I’ll see immediate results for the clients I work for. The more important changes, though – the systematic changes I hope to see in the world – won’t be immediate. To me, the Billion Oyster Project symbolizes the need for good work, even if the product of that work doesn’t manifest until much later.
Added:
>
>
I think this is a fine first draft. It gets out the material and gives us wonderful ways to think about it. One needed improvement is substantial tightening of the backstory. You have good sources and they're already linked so the reader can find out as much as she wants with two clicks. Therefore all you need is capsule summaries, barely more than 100 words.

The space made will allow you to write about your real question: why does the restoration of our shellfish commons make you feel good, and why should that matter to someone thinking about IP practice? Oysters are the biological intersection of fisheries and groundwater, two of the great examples of natural resources commons. One possibility is that you are experiencing the discovery that managing commons makes human beings feel good and monopoly makes them feel bad. The first woman to win a Nobel Prize in Economics, Elinor Ostrom, was the greatest thinker about commons in the 20th century. You might be interested in a little cartoon made by her Prize Trust. Because I am in the cartoon you can understand the relationship of Ellie's work to what I did in free software, and also why it makes me smile, as it makes me smile to think that I helped to destroy the world's most profitable pharmaceutical patent in 2006, costing Pfizer $84 billion and its CEO his job, among other such acts of intellectual anti-property.

Perhaps, just perhaps, those billion oysters are telling you that you too will be happier as an anti-IP lawyer, for commons and against government monopolies on ideas, after all.

 
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.

SarahKimFirstEssay 1 - 11 Mar 2022 - Main.SarahKim
Line: 1 to 1
Added:
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"

The World Is My Oyster?

-- By SarahKim - 11 Mar 2022

A few weeks ago, I went out to dinner with a couple law school friends: we were determined not to let out a peep about law school, landlord-tenant law, or contributory negligence – all of which had pretty much been consuming our lives. It was through this conscious effort to steer the conversation away from whining and complaining that I first learned of the Billion Oyster Project: a non-profit that has been working to restore the once-robust but now-barren oyster reefs across New York City, with the specific goal of restoring 1 billion oysters by 2035. Reading more about this project put a smile on my face – it gave me the tingly, heart-warming feeling that good news does sometimes.

History of Oysters in NYC

As Mark Kurlansky, author of The Big Oyster: History on the Half Shell said: “The history of the New York oyster is a history of New York itself—its wealth, its strength, its excitement, its greed, its thoughtfulness, its destructiveness, its blindness, and—as any New Yorker will tell you—its filth.” In the early 17th Century, oysters were far from a luxury in the city. They were so cheap and ubiquitous that they could easily be found bought and sold at cheap eateries, oyster cellars, or even on the streets at all hours. The demand was so high that eventually the oyster population went on a decline, and in 1715, the legislature had to ban harvesting in the city’s oyster reefs in the spring and summer to allow enough time for the ecosystem to replenish every year.

By the early 20th century, with urbanization and exponentially-growing Manhattan landfills, oyster beds in the city suffered degradation by over-harvesting, sewage pollution, and toxicity in the Hudson River. New York Harbor began to build a reputation for its filth and disease, and the oysters from the harbor became inedible. Oysters were no longer cheap foods of widespread consumption; New York City was no longer an “oyster capital.” In 1927, the city closed its last commercial oyster bed in Raritan Bay.

What the Project Does

The Billion Oyster Project was founded by Murray Fisher and Pete Malinowski; both worked at the Urban Assembly New York Harbor School as a director and aquaculture instructor, respectively. The two recognized the communal and environmental benefits of bringing oyster reefs back to New York Harbor. Water quality in the city began to steadily improve after the Clean Water Act of 1972, and now, despite still being polluted and unsanitary, New York Harbor is deemed clean enough for oyster reefs and other similar ecosystems to survive. Such a large-scale revival, however, is not one that can be undertaken by just two passionate advocates. Fisher and Malinowski thus adopted a unique approach to the Billion Oyster Project: to focus on education and outreach to get the community—ranging from students to volunteers to local restaurants—engaged in the ongoing effort to restore oyster beds in New York City.

A huge benefit of this approach is that it raises local awareness about the benefits of oyster reefs unknown to many. Aside from being a greatly loved source of food for the people in the city, oysters also serve as the foundation for the growth of many other species and marine wildlife. They are also essential for further improvements in the quality of water sources around the city – a single oyster can filter up to 50 gallons of water a day. Finally, large oyster reef ecosystems can act as natural storm barriers by softening the damage caused by large waves, as well as preventing flooding and erosion.

Since its founding, the Billion Oyster Project has restored 75 million oysters in the New York Harbor area. Oysters, and the project, are now symbols of resilience for the city: “a rare hopeful sign amid ominous news about New York waterways in the age of rapid climate change.” While it is true that the restored reefs are not safe to eat from for at least another few decades (or even centuries), the hope is that the project will carry on for generations to eventually bring vibrant marine life, cheap oyster eateries, and clean water back to New York City.

What Does This Mean For Me?

What started as an active avoidance of a discussion of the doom that is law school ironically got me thinking more about it. I thought about why hearing about the Billion Oyster Project particularly resonated with me, why I found it to be so much of a heart-warming and happy story. Was it the community? Sure, it’s nice to see local business owners and students and residents all working toward an environmental cause. Was it the morality of the work? Maybe, it’s always nice to hear something good in the midst of terrible, troubling things going on in the world.

But I think what struck me most was the fact that so many people were working so vigorously for a large-scale project whose effects they probably will not even live to see. The oysters being brought to New York Harbor now won’t be edible within my lifetime. Restoration of marine life, clean (enough) water in the Hudson, and reversal of erosion all take time and patience to manifest, as do many other environmental changes.

I’ve always thought of myself as a result-oriented person. I’ve found tangible representations of my work product to be one of the biggest motivating factors – which is why I’m interested in IP, as there’s almost always going to be a patent or product that I can visualize. But the law doesn’t always work that way. Of course, I’ll see immediate results for the clients I work for. The more important changes, though – the systematic changes I hope to see in the world – won’t be immediate. To me, the Billion Oyster Project symbolizes the need for good work, even if the product of that work doesn’t manifest until much later.


You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:

Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list.


Revision 4r4 - 27 May 2022 - 18:33:25 - MorganMartin
Revision 3r3 - 27 May 2022 - 02:28:57 - SarahKim
Revision 2r2 - 19 Mar 2022 - 15:51:50 - EbenMoglen
Revision 1r1 - 11 Mar 2022 - 05:22:20 - SarahKim
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM