INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Donald Harris
The New Prohibition: A Look at the Copyright Wars Through the Lens of Alcohol Prohibition, 80 Tenn. L. Rev. 101 (2012).
TRIPS After Fifteen Years: Success or Failure, as Measured by Compulsory Licensing, 18 J. Intell. Prop. L. 367 (2011).
TRIPS and Treaties of Adhesion Part II: Back to the Past or a Small Step Forward?, 2007 Mich. St. L. Rev. 185.
TRIPS' Rebound: An Historical Analysis of How the TRIPS Agreement Can Ricochet Back Against the United States, 25 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 99 (2004).

Laura Little
Regulating Funny: Humor and the Law, 94 Cornell L. Rev. 1235 (2009).

Gregory Mandel
Leveraging the International Economy of Intellectual Property, 75 Ohio St. L.J. ___ (forthcoming 2014).
The Public Perception of Intellectual Property, 66 Fla. L. Rev. 261 (2014).
Promoting Environmental Innovation with Intellectual Property Innovation: A New Basis for Patent Rewards, 24 Temple J. Sci. Tech. & Envtl. L. 51 (2005) reprinted in 5 ICFAI J. Intell. Prop. Rts. 12 (2006), reprinted in Law and Economics of Innovation 344 (E.M. Salzberger, Elgar 2012).
To Promote the Creative Process: Intellectual Property Law and the Psychology of Creativity, 86 Notre Dame L. Rev 1999 (2011).
Will America Reinvent Itself? Patent Reform in 2011, 2011-AUG Bus. L. Today 1.
Will America Reinvent Itself? The Patent Pendulum and Patent Reform in 2011, Temp. L. Rev. Online F. (Jul. 13, 2011).
Left-Brain versus Right-Brain: Competing Conceptions of Creativity in Intellectual Property Law, 44 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 283 (2010).
Another Missed Opportunity: The Supreme Court's Failure to Define Nonobviousness or Combat Hindsight Bias in KSR v. Teleflex, 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 323 (2008), reprinted in Patent L. Rev. 17 (2009).
The Non-Obvious Problem: How the Indeterminate Non-Obvious Standard Produces Excessive Patent Grants, 42 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 57 (2008).
When to Open Infrastructure Access, 35 Ecology L.Q. 205 (2008).
Does Hindsight Bias Affect Obviousness Rulings?, Nat'l L.J., Aug. 18, 2008.

Salil Mehra
Essential Facilities with Chinese Characteristics: A Different Perspective on the Compulsory Licensing of Intellectual Property, 3 J. Antitrust Enforcement ___ (Oxford UP forthcoming 2015).
Secondary Liability, ISP Immunity, and Incumbent Entrenchment, 62 Am. J. Comp. L. 685 (2014) (with M. Trimble) (invited submission).
Keep America Exceptional! Against Adopting Japanese and European-Style Criminalization of Contributory Copyright Infringement, 13 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 811 (2011).
The iPod Tax: Why the Digital Copyright System of American Law Professors' Dreams Failed in Japan, 79 U. Colo. L. Rev. 421 (2008), selected as a notable scholarly work to be reprinted in Copyright Annual Anthology (West 2009-10 ed.).
Software as Crime: Japan, the United States, and Contributory Copyright Infringement, 79 Tul. L. Rev. 265 (2004).
Copyright and Comics in Japan: Does Law Explain Why All the Cartoons My Kid Watches are Japanese Imports?, 55 Rutgers L. Rev. 155 (2002).

David Post
Don't Break the Internet, 64 Stan. L. Rev. Online 34 (2011) (with M. Lemley & D. Levine).
Professors’ Letter in Opposition to \"Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011\" to the United States Congress (Jul. 5, 2011) (with M. Lemley & D. Levine).

Henry Richardson
African Americans and International Law: For Professor Goler Teal Butcher, with Appreciation, 37 How. L.J. 217 (1994).