<?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, Technology and Communications</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=17</atom:link>
	<description>Current &amp; Recent Research by Penn Law School Faculty (15 most recently updated Law, Technology and Communications articles)</description>
	<language>en-us</language>
	
	
	<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[  Media Structure, Ownership Policy, and the First Amendment, 78 S. CAL. L. REV. 733 (2005). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=1521 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ C. Edwin Baker ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:43:05 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  The Convergence of Broadcasting and Telephony:  Legal and Regulatory Implications, 1 COMMC'NS & CONVERGENCE REV. (forthcoming Dec. 2009). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4700 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation:  <![CDATA[ This article, written for the inaugural issue of a new journal, analyzes the extent to which the convergence of broadcasting and telephony induced by the digitization of communications technologies is forcing policymakers to rethink their basic approach to regulating these industries.  Now that voice and video are becoming available through every transmission technology, policymakers can no longer define the scope of regulatory obligations in terms of the mode of transmission.  In addition, jurisdictions that employ separate agencies to regulate broadcasting and telephony must reform their institutional structures to bring both with the ambit of a single regulatory agency.  The emergence of intermodal competition will also place pressure on both telephone-style regulation, which protects against monopoly pricing and vertical exclusion, as well as broadcast-style regulation, which focuses on content and ownership structure.  It will also force regulators to rethink social policies such as universal service and public broadcasting.  At the same time, it is possible that convergence will be incomplete and that end users will maintain more than one network connection, which would reduce the danger of anticompetitive activity and allow policymakers to stop short of forcing every connection to be everything to everyone.  Lastly, the increase in traffic volumes associated with the advent of Internet video may require the deployment of multicast protocols, content delivery networks, and more aggressive traffic management, all of which potentially implicate the debate over network neutrality currently taking place in the U.S. ]]> </description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Tue, 3 Nov 2009 11:07:38 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Originality, 95 VA. L. REV. 1505 (2009) (with Alex Stein). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4610 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Gideon Parchomovsky ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 2 Nov 2009 14:09:17 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  On Trademarks, Domain Names and Internal Auctions, 2000 U. ILL. L. REV. 211 (2001). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=1210 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Gideon Parchomovsky ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:57:17 -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[  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>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Criminal Justice in the Information Age:  A Punishment Theory Paradox, 1 OHIO ST. J. CRIM. L. 683 (2004) (reprinted in LEGAL ASPECTS OF TECHNOLOGY (ICFAI: 2008)). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4683 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Paul Robinson ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 2 Sep 2009 16:07:15 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Viewpoint Diversity and Media Ownership, 61 FED. COMM. L.J. 651 (2009). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4303 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ C. Edwin Baker ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:51:12 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Three Cheers for Red Lion, 60 ADMIN. L. REV. 861 (2008). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4302 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ C. Edwin Baker ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:43:40 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Panel III: Indecent Exposure?  The FCCs Recent Enforcement of Obscenity Laws (symposium panel with Abner Greener, et al.), 15 FORDHAM INTELL. PROP. MEDIA & ENT. L.J.1087 (2005). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4660 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ C. Edwin Baker ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:40:23 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Panel II: Media and Free Speech: The Right Balance for Democracy (symposium panel with James Boyd White, et al.), 39 U. MICH. J.L. REFORM 296 (2006). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4659 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ C. Edwin Baker ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:35:25 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  The Role of Politics and Policy in Television Regulation, 53 EMORY L.J. 255 (2004). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=2696 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ Christopher Yoo ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:20:07 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		
	  <title><![CDATA[  Understanding Patent-Quality Mechanisms, 157 U. PA. L. REV. 2135 (2009). ]]> </title>
		<link><![CDATA[ http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/research/details.cfm?research_id=4650 ]]></link>
		
		<description>Author: <![CDATA[ R. Polk Wagner ]]>
		
		Citation: [No abstract on file]</description>
		<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 20 Aug 2009 11:38:04 -0500]]></pubDate>
	</item>
	
	
</channel>

</rss>