China's Apologetic Justice: Lessons for the United States?

dc.contributor.authorNguyen, Xuan-Thao
dc.date.accessioned2015-01-29T22:26:04Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.description.abstractMany scholars have criticized Congressional apology resolutions for slavery as inadequate and ineffective. Ironically, Congress may look to China’s apologetic justice in intentional intellectual property infringements to learn valuable lessons about apologies and how to incorporate them into righting wrongs. China requires that the wrongdoer who intentionally harms or infringes the intellectual property rights of another make a public apology in a newspaper or trade journal, in addition to stopping the harm and paying for compensatory damages and costs. If the wrongdoer does not timely make the public apology, the infringed party will draft and publish the public apology in the wrongdoer’s name and charge the associated expenses to the wrongdoer. Again, the public apology is in addition to, not in lieu of, injunctive relief and damages. If Congress approaches apology resolutions to slavery in a similar way to what China has done for remedies in intentional intellectual property infringements, Congress will adequately address scholars’ criticisms.en_US
dc.description.embargoforeveren_US
dc.embargo.lift10000-01-01
dc.identifier.citationXuan-Thao Nguyen, China's Apologetic Justice: Lessons for the United States?, 4 Columbia Journal of Race and Law 97 (2014)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/5757
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us
dc.titleChina's Apologetic Justice: Lessons for the United States?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
ul.alternative.fulltexthttp://ssrn.com/abstract=2455900en_US
Files
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.88 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: