• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Is YouTube, the popular video sharing website, a new revolution in information sharing or a profitable clearing-house for unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material? YouTube’s critics claim that it falls within the latter category, in line with Napster and Grokster. This comment, however, determines that YouTube is fundamentally different from past infringers in that it complies with statutory provisions concerning the removal of copyrighted materials.

Furthermore, YouTube’s central server architecture distinguishes it from peer-to-peer file sharing websites. This comment concludes that any comparison to Napster or Grokster is superficial, and overlooks the potential benefits of YouTube to copyright owners and to society at large.

YouTube, Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA, ViaCom, copyright, Google, safe harbor, Napster, Grokster

Abstract:
On January 21, 2009, President Barack Obama, in one of his first official acts in office, nullified George W. Bush’s controversial Executive Order 13233, which gave presidents, sitting and former, unprecedented powers to restrict public access to presidential records. In signing Executive Order 13489, Obama signaled his support for the principle of open government and tacitly rebuked the Bush administration for its favoritism toward secrecy.

Despite Obama's action, it is unclear how future administrations will treat presidential records. This paper argues that Congress should amend the Presidential Records Act to prevent abuses by codifying Obama's executive order and by strenghtening the role of the Archivist.

Part I of this paper briefly explores the historical treatment of presidential records since the founding of the republic. Part II discusses the Presidential Record Act's scope, intent, and its most important provisions. Next, Part III analyzes the challenges to the PRA since its implementation. Finally, Part IV provides recommendations to end the ambiguity toward the records.

Presidential Records Act, PRA, Executive Order 13233, Executive Order 13489, BlackBerry

Abstract:
During the Vietnam War, the United States conducted an herbicidal warfare program in South Vietnam to defeat the Viet Cong insurgency. After many years of research, it is now known that the mixture of chemicals in the Program, notably Agent Orange, caused a litany of diseases among Vietnam veterans. Despite this wealth of knowledge, scientists have been unable to link other diseases to the Program. One such illness is urinary bladder cancer, a particularly destructive malignancy. It is unknown how many Vietnam veterans suffer from the disease; however, anecdotal evidence suggests that this issue requires more attention. Emerging studies now suggest that Cacodylic Acid, a chemical used in the Program, may be responsible for bladder cancer among Vietnam veterans. This paper argues that the Department of Veterans Affairs should recognize this potential link by including urinary bladder cancer in the "presumptive category" under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309.

Vietnam, Agent Orange, herbicides, Cacodylic Acid, veteran, Veterans Affairs, dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, trichlorophrnoxyacetic, picloram, Institute of Medicine, Agent Orange Act, 38 C.F.R. § 3.309, bladder cancer, disability benefits