Design overview of USDL

Enabling web-based service networks and ecosystems requires a way of describing services by a "commercial envelope" as discussed in Chapter 1. A uniform conception of services across all walks of life (including technical services) is required capturing business, operational and technical aspects. Therefore, our proposed Unified Service Description Language (USDL) particularly draws from and generalizes the best-of-breed approaches presented in Part I. The following chapter presents the design rationale of USDL where the different aspects are put in a framework of descriptions requirements. This is followed by the subsequent chapters of this part that provide details on specific aspects such as pricing or legal issues.

Law student psychological distress, ADR and sweet-minded, sweet-eyed hope

Empirical studies conducted by both Australian and American researchers have established law school’s causative role in increasing law student psychological distress. The purpose of this article is to highlight the role that law school curriculum might play in addressing this problem. By utilising lessons from the field of positive psychology (and in particular hope theory) a first-year law subject at the Queensland University of Technology has been specifically designed to promote law student well-being. Traditional legal education and pedagogy do not hold the answers for addressing this social phenomenon. A first-year curriculum that introduces students to alternative dispute resolution, non-adversarial justice, resilience and the positive role of lawyers in society may go some way to addressing the law student well-being challenge.

Integrity, attribution, and exploitation : contractual and normative moral rights protection in open licensing

Over the last twenty years, the use of open content licenses has become increasingly and surprisingly popular. The use of such licences challenges the traditional incentive-based model of exclusive rights under copyright. Instead of providing a means to charge for the use of particular works, what seems important is mitigating against potential personal harm to the author and, in some cases, preventing non-consensual commercial exploitation. It is interesting in this context to observe the primacy of what are essentially moral rights over the exclusionary economic rights. The core elements of common open content licences map somewhat closely to continental conceptions of the moral rights of authorship. Most obviously, almost all free software and free culture licences require attribution of authorship. More interestingly, there is a tension between social norms developed in free software communities and those that have emerged in the creative arts over integrity and commercial exploitation. For programmers interested in free software, licence terms that prohibit commercial use or modification are almost completely inconsistent with the ideological and utilitarian values that underpin the movement. For those in the creative industries, on the other hand, non-commercial terms and, to a lesser extent, terms that prohibit all but verbatim distribution continue to play an extremely important role in the sharing of copyright material. While prohibitions on commercial use often serve an economic imperative, there is also a certain personal interest for many creators in avoiding harmful exploitation of their expression – an interest that has sometimes been recognised as forming a component of the moral right of integrity. One particular continental moral right – the right of withdrawal – is present neither in Australian law or in any of the common open content licences. Despite some marked differences, both free software and free culture participants are using contractual methods to articulate the norms of permissible sharing. Legal enforcement is rare and often prohibitively expensive, and the various communities accordingly rely upon shared understandings of acceptable behaviour. The licences that are commonly used represent a formalised expression of these community norms and provide the theoretically enforceable legal baseline that lends them legitimacy. The core terms of these licences are designed primarily to alleviate risk in sharing and minimise transaction costs in sharing and using copyright expression. Importantly, however, the range of available licences reflect different optional balances in the norms of creating and sharing material. Generally, it is possible to see that, stemming particularly from the US, open content licences are fundamentally important in providing a set of normatively accepted copyright balances that reflect the interests sought to be protected through moral rights regimes. As the cost of creation, distribution, storage, and processing of expression continues to fall towards zero, there are increasing incentives to adopt open content licences to facilitate wide distribution and reuse of creative expression. Thinking of these protocols not only as reducing transaction costs but of setting normative principles of participation assists in conceptualising the role of open content licences and the continuing tensions that permeate modern copyright law.

The role of the rule of law in virtual communities

Please see the updated published version of this work at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/37850/ There is a severe tendency in cyberlaw theory to delegitimize state intervention in the governance of virtual communities. Much of the existing theory makes one of two fundamental flawed assumptions: that communities will always be best governed without the intervention of the state; or that the territorial state can best encourage the development of communities by creating enforceable property rights and allowing the market to resolve any disputes. These assumptions do not ascribe sufficient weight to the value-laden support that the territorial state always provides to private governance regimes, the inefficiencies that will tend to limit the development utopian communities, and the continued role of the territorial state in limiting autonomy in accordance with communal values...