Opening Word document…

The Counterplan ensures innovation by allowing greater stakeholder participation preventing corruption and ensuring corporate lobbying does not dominate cases

Guan 24 [Taori; Chicago Journal of International Law; “ARTICLE: Cooperative Federalism and Patent Legislation: A Study Comparing China and the United States.”; advance-lexis-com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/api/document?collection=analytical-materials&id=urn:contentItem:6BBP-B4N1-JC8V-42D0-00000-00&context=1519360; Lowell-CS]

The third limitation is that legal reforms through the court system can lead to insufficient participation from stakeholders. Local stakeholders, especially those who have not instigated these cases, have limited opportunities to influence judicial interpretation directly. This is because courts base their decisions primarily on the legal arguments that the parties involved in the litigation present. Conversely, stakeholders can offer direct input that helps to shape local legislation, ensuring that patent laws reflect their priorities and needs. Some critics argue that the Federal Circuit's patent jurisprudence has become isolated and disconnected from the technological communities it affects.236 Comparatively, when local governments have legislative authority, as is the case in China, local citizens can also advocate for legal reforms that are tailored to their specific needs by influencing local legislation through public consultations,237 expressing views to representatives,238 and collaborating with NGOs.239 This approach allows for more informed legislation. Moreover, Article 87 of the Legislative Law of China requires local legislators to make drafts public and to solicit the public's opinions.240 Stakeholders can also influence legislation by providing comments.

Sign in to recut, update, or save this card.