Vol. 8 (2012)
Click link to view PDF
Lark Zink, A Framework for Untangling Intents in Posthumous Sperm Extraction, 8 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 61 (2012)
"Posthumous reproduction involves the conception and birth of a child by the means of artificial reproductive technology, after the death of either parent. Through technological innovation, death is no longer a bar to the creation of new life. By means of technologies that separate reproduction from the coital act, a widow may assert a claim to the sperm of her deceased husband in order to bear his genetically-related child. While medical practice and technological advances have yielded a wide range of reproductive possibilities, the law has lagged behind in its recognition and legal characterization of such acts. In this new legal forefront, courts have generally responded to the prospect of posthumous reproduction in one of two ways: 1) by effectuating the intent of the donor, or 2) employing a constitutional balancing of rights test. This paper will trace the development of these two tests."
Justin Hinderliter, iRight: There's No App for That, 8 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 60 (2012)
"The privacy rights at issue in this comment concern not only the contexts of smartphones and tablets, but also those relating to Global Positioning Systems ('GPS'), tracking devices and other enhanced surveillance capabilities utilized by government officials. While these two areas may appear facially distinct, both share two fundamental qualities – possessory interests in property and a reasonable expectation of privacy by its user against governmental invasion. The Supreme Court has held that ownership interests include the right to be let alone from unwanted interference. Additionally, Black’s Law Dictionary defines possessory interests as 'the right to control property, including the right to exclude others.' If ownership interests include the ability to exclude others, and possessory interests include the right to control property and exclude others from trespassing upon that property, and if these technological devices are considered property, then do they not deserve the same protection under the Fourth Amendment as other 'effects'? If this contention is logical, and precedence is followed from previous holdings, then a person‟s technological property deserves this protection that is conveyed upon 'effects' under the Fourth Amendment."
January Turner, Tinkering with Tinker: Applying a New Test to Peer on Peer Bullying in Social Media, 8 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 59 (2012)
"The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the State itself and all of its creatures-Boards of Education not excepted. These have, of course, important, delicate, and highly discretionary functions, but none that they may not perform within the limits of the Bill of Rights. That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes."
Nicollette Brandt, Louboutin's Trademark Suit Against Yves Saint Laurent: Creating a Color War in the Fashion Industry, 8 OKLA. J.L. & TECH. 58 (2012)
"In January 2008, Christian Louboutin S.A., Christian Louboutin L.L.C., and Christian Louboutin obtained trademark protection for the now infamous 'Red-Sole Mark' from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The certificate of registration claimed protection over 'the color(s) red . . .' and '. . . a lacquered red-sole on footwear.' After years of use in commerce, secondary meaning had been established and trademark protection of the “Red-Sole Mark” was granted. Competitors attempted to duplicate Louboutin’s red-soled shoes, but Louboutin actively policed the 'Red-Sole Mark' to shut down copyists. In April 2011, after urging fellow designer Yves Saint Laurent to discontinue his production of red-soled shoes, specifically the Tribute, Tribtoo, Palais, and Woodstock models in YSL’s Cruise 2011 Collection, each bearing a bright red sole as part of a monochromatic design, Louboutin filed a trademark infringement suit against YSL asserting multiple claims under the Lanham Act and requesting a preliminary injunction. YSL responded with several counterclaims, including a request for cancellation of the 'Red-Sole Mark.' In August 2011, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that the designer was not entitled to a preliminary injunction to enjoin Yves Saint Laurent from using a red outsole on its own shoe design. . . . An analysis of the decision reveals that the district court erred in its evaluation of Louboutin’s 'Red-Sole Mark' by ignoring both the Lanham Act and controlling precedent in trademark law."
Jessica Nicole Cory, The Gap Created by E-Commerce: How States Can Preserve Their Sales and Use Tax Revenue in the Digital Age, 8 OKLA. L.J. & TECH. 57 (2012)
"Since its inception in 1932, the state sales tax has become an increasingly important source of revenue for most states, including Oklahoma. Today, forty-five states and the District of Columbia impose a general sales tax. Nationally, these taxes resulted in $224.5 billion of revenue in 2010, which, at 31.9% of total state tax collections, represents the second greatest source of state revenue. Oklahoma collected $5,164,499,000 in revenue in 2010. Of that total, approximately 38%, or $1,968,309,000, came from general sales taxes. States that do not impose a state income tax—such as Florida, Nevada, Texas, and Washington—rely even more heavily on sales tax dollars, with sales taxes generating a majority of their tax revenues."
Nicollette Brandt, "Stop Online Piracy Act," OKJOLT Blog
"On January 18, 2012, thousands of websites went black in an effort to protest the 'Stop Online Piracy Act,' a bill designed to broaden U.S. law enforcement’s ability to stop online trafficking of intellectual property and counterfeit goods. Internet moguls like Wikipedia, Reddit, and Mozilla blocked access to their websites to represent the effects that copyright owners could have on websites they merely accused of copyright infringement."