On July 30, 2012, California Proposition 8 proponents petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, petitioners (the original “Defendant-Intervenors”) ask the Court to review the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ opinion in Perry v. Brown, (671 F.3d 1052), which affirmed the district court’s determination that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional (Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921).
We have prepared a timeline of key events, and gathered the main briefs and opinions, for the Prop. 8 federal cases leading up to the Hollingsworth petition. These are intended as highlight compilations only. Both are linked below.
As stated — importantly — in the abstract to her article:
An informed democratic society needs open access to the law, but states’ attempts to protect copyright interests in their laws are a major roadblock [boldface added].
She considers, among other things, the complexity of copyright law for state and local government works, plus how that law could be changed (by 3 main avenues: legislation, litigation, and persuasion).
Data breach notification and disclosure laws are emerging around the globe. The following article and table examine the specifics of data breach notification frameworks in multiple jurisdictions. Over the year of 2008, Alana Maurushat of the Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre, with research assistance from David Vaile and student interns Renee Watts, Nathalie Pala, Michael Whitbread, Eugenie Kyung-Eun Hwang and David Chau, compiled the data. The table represents a detailed survey of data breach disclosure requirements in 25 countries, conducted by surveying those current or proposed statutory or similar instruments setting out the nature and conditions of such requirements to give notice. The Centre hopes that the table will be useful to compare and contrast elements of data breach notification schemes. The researchers at the CLPC will research the effectiveness of such schemes in future projects.