Haochen Sun

Designing Journeys to the Social World: Hegel's Theory of Property and His Noble Dreams Revisited

The conventional interpretations of Hegel’s theory of property show that property plays an important role in developing human individuality through the person-to-thing relationship. In this paper, I seek to repudiate the conventional interpretations by demonstrating that they are narrow-minded and unfaithful to Hegel’s thought on property. I then offer a new interpretation of Hegel’s theory of property. By and large, I aim to show that Hegel’s property theory provides a vantage point for us to rethink the relationship between persons and society in general and the nature of property in particular. Situated in the whole picture of Hegel’s social theory of freedom, I demonstrate that Hegel sees property as a social institution that plays a crucial role in shaping human individuality as well as sociability. On the one hand, mediated by the institution of property, a person nurtures and develops individuality or personal freedom in the social world consisting of things and other persons. On the other hand, the institution of property facilitates the cultivation of sociability by helping human beings become members of our society. Furthermore, social institutions in the Hegelian ethical life act as the indispensable catalyst for empowering property to spark the synergies between human individuality and sociability so as to actualize freedom for all human beings.

Toward a New Social-Political Theory of the Public Trust Doctrine

This Article puts forward a new social–political theory of the public trust doctrine by demonstrating that the doctrine is a legal tool that embodies both rights-conferring and responsibilities-imposing functions. The new theory, as the Article shows, is capable of yielding effective responses to the criticisms that have been leveled against the doctrine and the conventional theories upon which the doctrine was founded. Based on the role of public space in human development, the Article first discusses how and why the public trust doctrine has functioned to protect public spaces by conferring upon citizens four categories of public rights. The Article then argues that we should regard the public trust doctrine as a legal tool to enforce the public trust principle as a fundamental constitutional principle affording citizens fundamental rights over public space that is indispensable for human development. The protection of the public interest under this principle embodies the fundamental human value of protecting public space and underscores the need for the legal system to be shaped in a manner that effectuates this human value. Moreover, the Article contends that while it grants citizens fundamental rights over public spaces, the public trust principle underlying the public trust doctrine also impresses social responsibilities upon the stakeholders regarding the protection of public space. Through the enforcement of social responsibilities, the doctrine promotes a stewardship ethic of protecting the public spaces in society. In this respect, the Article alters the conventional trusteeship model under the public trust doctrine, which deems the government to be the sole trustee responsible for managing public resources. It demonstrates that the social responsibility model of stewardship requires not only the government but also the judiciary and individuals as members of the public to act as the stewards of public resources.

Entertainment Utopia Through Compulsory Licensing and Network Neutrality

This chapter explores sensible ways of addressing the conflict between the public interest in enjoying copyrighted contents and the private interest in protecting the right to receive copyright royalties. It utilizes the recent landmark litigations over online television streaming technologies, such as Aereo and TVCatchup, to analyze the nature of this type of conflict of interest. The chapter further considers the roles of compulsory licensing and network neutrality in promoting the public interest in the provision of online streaming services and in guarding the private interest in the protection of copyrights.

Reforming Anti-Dilution Protection in the Globalization of Luxury Brands

The luxury industry plays an important role in many contemporary western and eastern societies. This Article discusses the rapid global expansion of the luxury industry and the role of anti-dilution laws in protecting luxury brands. It reveals that luxury companies face two major challenges in securing adequate anti-dilution protection while they market their products or services globally. At the international level, the major intellectual property treaties afford no minimum standards for anti-dilution protection of well-known trademarks. At the domestic level, divergences in anti-dilution protection in the world’s three main luxury markets, the European Union, the United States, and China, have rendered it more difficult for luxury companies to prevent and stop the potential dilutions of their brands. Based on the analysis of these two challenges, the Article offers thoughts about how policymakers should improve anti-dilution protection for luxury brands while meeting their duties to adequately protect the public interest.