| Cover |
-
Normality
Lasani S Wijetunge
Neuroimaging has become a
sophisticated tool that can be used to understand how our brain
activities lead to higher order cognitive functions, such as
thoughts and perceptions, as well as to examine what happens in
the diseased state. In the future, if a neuroimage of your brain
were to be used as a signature of you, your thoughts and
actions-whose neuroimage would you compare yours against to
determine whether your brain activities are 'normal'?
|
| Editorial |
- Twitter Chip
Simon Biggs, pp.120-123
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
Simon Biggs gives an interesting
perspective about cyborg-like technology, such as brain implants
and augmented reality spectacles. It may seem like science
fiction, but these are technologies that are closer than you
imagine.
|
| Reviewed Articles |
- Does Technology Trump Intellectual Property?: Re-framing
the Debate About Regulating New Technologies
Michael Anthony C. Dizon, pp.124-137
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
Does technology trump
intellectual property rights (IPR)? In the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Studios v Grokster case, Justice Breyer believes this to be so.
This article will analyse whether Justice Breyer’s belief has
valid legal and empirical bases in light of the different cases
and legislations that seek to resolve the challenges brought
about by new technologies vis-à-vis IPRs. This article argues
that the proposition that law favours technology over IPRs
requires further qualification in order to prevent one from
falling into the traps of technological determinism,
instrumentalism and the belief in the neutrality of technology.
A re-framing of the debate is needed which goes beyond the
traditional technology versus IP dichotomy and focuses on the
main goal of technological development and IP protection, which
is to advance innovation in its broadest sense.
- Arguments in Considering the Similarity of Algorithms in
Patenting
Kenneth Oksanen, Perttu Virtanen, Eljas Soisalon-Soininen,
Jukka Kemppinen, pp.138-153
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
The determination as to whether
or not two algorithms in a computer programme are similar enough
to be considered ‘the same’ algorithm can be crucial in patent
prosecution and other legal disputes, from theft of trade
secrets to patent infringement. Establishment of prior art by
the responsible court involves consideration of the contemporary
practices of software engineers and computer scientists who
develop and implement algorithms. This paper, co-authored by two
computer scientists and two legal professionals, reviews those
arguments that can be used to assess the similarity of
algorithms, in relation to the criteria of novelty for a grant
of patent.
- Liability of Internet Intermediaries: a Slippery Slope?
Maurice Schellekens , pp.154-174
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
Should Internet intermediaries
do more to prevent illegal and harmful content than they do now?
A negative answer to this question is sometimes underpinned by a
slippery slope argument. This posits that an intermediary cannot
begin doing more, for once he gives in to demands for new duties
of care, the range of demands will quickly increase and it may
be hard to identify a plausible cut-off point where the
intermediary can begin to refuse accepting further duties of
care. So, according to the argument, the intermediary is better
off not accepting duties of care at all. But is this slippery
slope argument valid in the context of liability of Internet
intermediaries? Is it really applicable? Is there evidence that
a slide would occur? This article examines one such duty of
care, viz. a monitoring duty, asks how this duty of care could
fit in the relevant European regulation of e-commerce and
analyses whether a slippery slope argument for fending off
monitoring duties has merit. In doing so, a framework for
testing slippery slope arguments is distinguished and applied to
the case of monitoring duties. Case law from a number of
European countries is analysed to shed light on the likelihood
that well-known slippery slope mechanisms can work in the
context of Internet intermediary liability.
- Ethical Implications of Brain Imaging in Psychosis and
Psychopathy
Emma Sprooten, Louise Robinson and Stephen M Lawrie,
pp.175-183
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
In recent decades, advances in
structural and functional brain imaging have identified brain
abnormalities associated with psychiatric disorders. This surge
in knowledge about the biological underpinnings of psychiatric
constructs including psychosis and psychopathy is potentially
useful for improving treatment and diagnosis, but also
necessitates the consideration of its ethical implications. More
recent studies highlight the power of brain imaging as a
potential early diagnostic aid for schizophrenia, raising issues
about the desirability of this information for individuals,
services and society. More fundamentally, the increasing
emphasis on the biological component of psychiatric disorders
may change the way patients view themselves and their potential
for recovery, and alter stigmatisation by others. The
association of particular imaging findings with psychopathy and
antisocial personality disorder gives rise to even more complex
ethical implications involving accountability and diminished
responsibility. Mitigating evidence based on brain scans is
being used in court cases already, despite several
methodological and fundamental problems. These include the
translation from scientific group-bases analysis to individuals,
the misleading and “seductive allure” of brain images to the
layperson, and the difficulty of providing definitive evidence
for brain-behaviour causality. In sum, progress in brain imaging
alters our notion of psychiatric disorders and opens new
possibilities for applications, whether or not ethically or
scientifically justified. In order to avoid hampering a
potentially positive impact of this progress on patients and
wider society, it is important that the ethical implications are
considered in time, by all parties involved.
- Responsibility and the Automaticity Threat
Tillman Vierkant, pp.184-191
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
There is a common perception
that brain imaging poses a great threat to our ability to
control our own minds and hence to our ability to have a whole
cluster of abilities (autonomy, responsibility, culpability)
relevant in the context of the law. It is said that brain
imaging in the future will give scientists the ability to get
direct access to our inner most selves possibly even against our
will. Equally, it is claimed that brain imaging might allow for
mind reading and make us fully predictable, thereby rendering us
helpless to thwart the predictions. In this paper I want to
debunk these myths. I argue that brain imaging only seems more
worrying than behavioural sciences, because it taps into a folk
reductionist view of the mind according to which the mind is the
brain. Secondly, I argue that predictability in the relevant
sense is a myth for conceptual reasons.
Nevertheless, I think there is a real threat to our ability to
control our own minds that comes from the cognitive sciences
that deal with the cognitive unconscious. I end with some
suggestions how this challenge can be transformed into a chance.
|
| Analysis |
- India’s new Data Protection Legislation
Raghunath Ananthapur, pp.192-203
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
With the increase in importance
of the outsourcing business in India, there has been extensive
discussion regarding the absence of Indian data protection
legislation, and how this may impact the flow of business from
European Union companies. India has, in the past, attempted to
enact data protection legislation, but for some reason it has
never seen the light of day.
India has recently notified regulations relating to protection
of sensitive personal data. This article examines the Indian
regulations, contrasting their provisions, at certain points,
with the UK Data Protection Act 1998.
- Brain imaging, the legal process and neurofantasy; can it
be cured (by applying the principles of evidence – based
medicine)?
Peter Sandercock and Joanna Wardlaw, pp.204-211
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
Advanced brain imaging
techniques, originally designed for medical and basic science
research purposes, are now being applied in a much wider range
of settings for very diverse purposes. There is a concern that
some of the exaggerated claims for the utility of these
technologies in these new settings, combined with their
inappropriate use (or uncritical interpretation) may lead to a
variety of unintended and sometimes adverse consequences. We
propose that the principles of critical appraisal, developed for
assessing medical technologies (so called ‘evidence-based
medicine’), might usefully be applied to reduce the risk of such
unintended consequences. In this article, we discuss how these
principles might be relevant to the application of neuroimaging
techniques to various aspects of the law and the legal process.
|
| Reports |
- Phase I Report of Implanted Smart Technologies Project
Shawn H E Harmon, pp.212-222
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
|
| Book Reviews |
- Innovation and Liabilityin Biotechnology:
Transnational and Comparative Perspectives
By Stuart J. Smyth, A. Bryan Endres, Thomas P. Redick and
Drew L. Kershe
Reviewed by Kathryn Pickard, pp.223-225
|
HTML |
DOC |
PDF |
|
| |
|
