<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/blogs/rss2.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">

<channel>
	<title>Penn Law Current &amp; Recent Research - Law and Economics</title>
	<link>http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/index.cfm</link>
	<atom:link>http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/rss.cfm?subject=10</atom:link>
	<description>Current &amp; Recent Research by Penn Law School Faculty (15 most recently updated Law and Economics articles)</description>
	<language>en-us</language>
	
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Do Institutions Matter? The Impact of the Lead Plaintiff Provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, 83 WASH. U. L.Q. 869 (2005) (with Stephen Choi & A.C. Pritchard). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=2368 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Jill Fisch ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:49:23 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Regulatory Responses to Investor Irrationality: The Case of the Research Analyst, 10 LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 57 (2006). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=2367 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Jill Fisch ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:44:42 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Network Neutrality After Comcast:  Toward a Case-by-Case Approach to Reasonable Network Management, in NEW DIRECTIONS IN COMMUNICATIONS POLICY 55 (Randolph J. May ed., Carolina Academic Press 2009). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=3986 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation:  <![CDATA[ The Federal Communications Commissions recent Comcast decision has rejected categorical, ex ante restrictions on Internet providers ability to manage their networks in favor of a more flexible approach that examines each dispute on a case-by-case basis, as I have long advocated.  This book chapter, written for a conference held in February 2009, discusses the type of considerations that a case-by-case approach should take into account.  First, allowing the network to evolve will promote innovation by allowing the emergence of applications that depend on a fundamentally different network architecture.  Indeed, as the universe of Internet users and applications becomes more heterogeneous, it is only natural for the services that networks provide to diversify in response.  Allowing prioritized services would also benefit consumers by allowing each class of services to purchase only the level of service that they need.  More diverse business relationships would also allow the network to reflect the insights of two-sided markets, which suggest that the money flowing through the network will often vary in magnitude and direction over time.  Any mandated access regime would also confront substantial implementation difficulties and would raise the capital costs of deploying network facilities.  Lastly, a case-by-case approach to network neutrality would provide better ex ante guidance if it incorporated the jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court applying the rule of reason under the antitrust laws. ]]> </description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:49:34 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Product Life Cycle Theory and the Maturation of the Internet, 103 NW. U. L. REV. (forthcoming Winter 2010). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4481 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation:  <![CDATA[ Much of the recent debate over Internet policy has focused on the permissibility of business practices that are becoming increasingly common, such as new forms of network management, prioritization, pricing, and strategic partnerships.  This Essay analyzes these developments through lens of the management literature on the product life cycle, dominant designs, technological trajectories and design hierarchies, and the role of complementary assets in determining industry structure.  This analysis suggests that many of these business practices may represent nothing more than a reflection of how the nature competition changes as industries mature.  This in turn suggests that network neutrality and other proposals to restrict such practices run the risk of diverting the industry from its natural evolutionary path. ]]> </description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:54:39 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Bribes v. Bombs: A Study in Coasean Warfare, 29 INT'L REV. L. & ECON. 179 (2009) (with Peter Siegelman). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4613 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Gideon Parchomovsky ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 2 Nov 2009 14:03:28 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Reconceptualizing Trespass, 103 NW. U. L. REV. __ (forthcoming 2009) (with Alex Stein). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4612 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Gideon Parchomovsky ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:57:32 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Implementing Cost-Benefit Analysis when Preferences are Distorted, 29 J. LEGAL STUD. 1105 (2000) (with Eric Posner) (also published as a chapter in COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: LEGAL, ECONOMIC AND  PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=665 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Matthew Adler ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 8 Oct 2009 18:07:20 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Free Speech and the Myth of the Internet as an Unintermediated Experience, 78 GEO. WASH. L. REV. (forthcoming May 2010). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4699 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation:  <![CDATA[ In recent years, a growing number of commentators have raised concerns that the decisions made by Internet intermediaries ? including last-mile network providers, search engines, social networking sites, and smartphones ? are inhibiting free speech and have called for restrictions on their ability to prioritize or exclude content.  Such calls ignore the fact that when mass communications are involved, intermediation helps end users to protect themselves from unwanted content and allows them to sift through the avalanche of desired content that grows ever larger every day.  Intermediation also helps solve a number of classic economic problems associated with the Internet.  In short, intermediation of mass media content is inevitable and often beneficial.  Calls to restrict intermediation have also largely overlooked the tradition (long recognized by the Supreme Courts First Amendment jurisprudence with respect to other forms of electronic communication) recognizing how intermediaries exercises of editorial discretion promote free speech values.  The debate also ignores the inauspicious/dubious history of past efforts to regulate the scope of electronic intermediaries editorial discretion, which were characterized by the inability to develop coherent standards, a chilling effect on controversial speech, and manipulation of the rules for political purposes. ]]> </description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 23 Sep 2009 06:20:58 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  The Economic Impact of International Labor Migration: Recent Estimates and Policy Implications, 16 TEMP. POL. & CIV. RTS. L. REV. 321 (2007). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=2589 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Howard Chang ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:46:14 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Cultural Communities in a Global Labor Market: Immigration Restrictions as Residential Segregation, 2007 U. CHI. L.F. 321.  ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=1826 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Howard Chang ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:28:28 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  The Economics of International Labor Migration and the Case for Global Distributive Justice in Liberal Political Theory, 41 CORNELL INT'L L.J. 1 (2008). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=2729 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Howard Chang ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:12:01 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  The Disadvantages of Immigration Restriction as a Policy to Improve Income Distribution (symposium contribution), 61 SMU L. REV. 23 (2008).  ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4779 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Howard Chang ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:59:41 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Immigration Restriction as Redistributive Taxation:  Working Women and the Costs of Protectionism in the Labor Market, 5 J. L. ECON. & POL'Y 1 (2009) ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=3416 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Howard Chang ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:50:50 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Innovations in the Internet's Architecture that Challenge the Status Quo, 8 J. ON TELECOMM. & HIGH TECH. L. (forthcoming Fall 2009). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=3984 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation:  <![CDATA[ The current debate over broadband policy has largely overlooked a number of changes to the architecture of the Internet that have caused the price paid by and quality of service received by traffic traveling across the Internet to vary widely.  Topological innovations, such as private peering, multihoming, secondary peering, server farms, and content delivery networks, have caused the Internets traditionally hierarchical architecture to be replaced by one that is more heterogeneous.  Moreover, network providers have begun to employ an increasingly varied array of business arrangements.  Some of these innovations are responses to the growing importance of peer-to-peer technologies.  Others, such as paid peering and partial transit, are driven by the growing dominance of advertising-based business models as well as the insights provided by the economics of two-sided markets.  At times interpreted as network providers attempts to promote their self interest at the expense of the public, these changes often reflect network providers attempts to reduce cost, manage congestion, and maintain quality of service.  As such, they have the potential to yield substantial benefits both to individual consumers and to society as a whole. ]]> </description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:34:50 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  NETWORKS IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS:  ECONOMICS AND LAW (Cambridge Univ. Press 2009) (with Daniel F. Spulber). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=1759 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Authors: <![CDATA[ Daniel Spulber ]]>, <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 4 Sep 2009 02:22:23 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	
</channel>

</rss>