Vol. 61, Issue 5, 2009December 01, 2009 EDT
When “Now Known or Later Developed” Fails its Purpose: How P2P Litigation Has Turned the Distribution Right Upside-Down
When “Now Known or Later Developed” Fails its Purpose: How P2P Litigation Has Turned the Distribution Right Upside-Down
Vincent J. Galluzzo,
Articles in Vol. 61, Issue 5, 2009
Vol. 61, Issue 5, 2009
- Bush, Gore, Florida, and the ConstitutionAkhil Reed Amar
- The Meaning of Bush v. Gore: Thoughts on Professor Amar's AnalysisErwin Chemerinksy
- Bush . Gore and the Lawlessness Principle: A Comment on Professor AmarRichard L. Hasen
- From Bush v. Gore to Namudno: A Response to Professor AmarEllen D. Katz
- Bush v. Gore at the Dawning of the Age of ObamaNelson Lund
- Rethinking the Parameters of Trademark Use in EntertainmentElizabeth L. Rosenblatt
- Second-Order Proof RulesMichael S. Pardo
- When Immigration Borders MoveHuyen Pham
- When "Now Known or Later Developed" Fails its Purpose: How P2P Litigation Has Turned the Distribution Right Upside-DownVincent J. Galluzzo
- A Great Gamble: Why Compromise Is the Best Bet to Resolve Florida’s Indian Gaming CrisisAllison Sirica
Vincent J. Galluzzo, When “Now Known or Later Developed” Fails Its Purpose: How P2P Litigation Has Turned the Distribution Right Upside-Down, 61 Fla. L. Rev. 1165 (2009).