Clothing designs can be beautiful. But they are also functional. Fashion’s dual nature sits uneasily in intellectual property law, and its treatment by copyright, trademark, and design patent laws has often been perplexing. Much of this difficulty arises from an unclear understanding of the nature of functionality in fashion design. This chapter proposes a robust account of fashion’s function. It argues that aspects of garment designs are functional not only when they affect the physical or technological performance of a garment but also when they affect the perception of the wearer’s body. Generally, clothes are not designed or chosen simply to look good. They are also characteristically designed or chosen to look good on. This approach clarifies the appropriate treatment of fashion design in intellectual property, and it exposes the conceptual limitations of the U.S. Supreme Court’s copyright decision in Star Athletica, L.L.C. v Varsity Brands, Inc.

The rapid development of drone technologies and ever-increasing numbers of drone operations have introduced new challenges to privacy in the context of aerial surveillance. This chapter reveals the diverse ways in which the use of drone technology can interfere with the right to privacy and stresses how the advanced capabilities of modern drones contribute to the increased frequency and severity of privacy violations. The chapter also explores the broader implications of drone regulation on human rights, emphasising the tension between protecting privacy and ensuring other rights, such as freedom of expression and the right to property. It draws attention to the necessity for legislators to develop a comprehensive understanding of these threats to craft an effective legal framework. By critically examining existing drone legislation, particularly from a European perspective, the chapter highlights the main areas on which a legal response to the threats posed by the use of drones should concentrate. A proactive and holistic regulatory approach is proposed, balancing the competing interests of privacy protection, innovation, and other fundamental rights.

This chapter examines the phenomenon of disinformation in the digital era and its implications for freedom of expression. It explores how the rapid dissemination of false, manipulated, and misleading information – termed a ‘disinfodemic’ – poses threats to human rights, democracy, and public trust. The chapter outlines the historical roots of disinformation, the technological factors that enable it, and the responses by public and private actors to mitigate its harmful effects. The chapter differentiates between disinformation (intentional), misinformation (unintentional), and malinformation (genuine information used to harm), while highlighting their diverse forms, such as fake news, deepfakes, and conspiracy theories. Disinformation erodes public trust, affects electoral integrity, threatens public health, and harms individuals’ rights to information and privacy. The chapter emphasises the necessity of finding a balance between combating disinformation and preserving freedom of expression.

This chapter offers a definition of a local priest. It explores the normative framework inherited from Late Antiquity that defined their status and regulated their behaviour, but also stresses that the label designates a social fact rather than a specific grade within the Church. To illustrate the diversity that the term encompasses and the methodological challenges that studying these people involves, the chapter offers four case studies of particular local priests in different parts of the former Carolingian empire, from Saxony through to southern France.

Fashion – the way we dress – is often an important reflection of the zeitgeist or the spirit of a given point and place in time. The fashion phenomena of recent years, such as self-disruption, upcycling and phygital experiences, can be studied as characteristics of a post-postmodern condition where a new cultural paradigm has emerged. The term post-postmodern has appeared in an increasing number of scholarly works that address a new cultural milieu – one that faces shifting global political centres and geopolitical boundaries, threats of climate change and an endangered ecosystem, destabilisation from armed conflicts and pandemics, obsessions with autonomous individuality, accelerating advances in artificial intelligence and the pervasiveness of information and communications technology in our daily lives. This chapter explores how such theories may be relevant to understanding contemporary fashion trends and their implications for intellectual property laws.

The chapter examines internet addiction as a threat to human rights. Medical research indicates that excessive internet use can lead to mental and physical health issues, behavioural risks, and impaired functioning. Specific features of the internet, such as ease of access and anonymity, may contribute to addiction. Although only a minority develop this addiction, vulnerable groups, especially children and those with pre-existing mental health conditions, are at higher risk. Law and policy responses include public health approaches, consumer protection, and initiatives to protect vulnerable groups. The right to disconnect is emerging as a potential solution, particularly in work contexts, but its effectiveness in addressing internet addiction is limited. International human rights law provides a framework for addressing internet addiction, but specific interpretations are still developing. Multidisciplinary approaches integrating mental health research with legal analysis are crucial for developing effective responses.

This chapter introduces the book by presenting the main puzzle motivating it – variation in deference. It suggests that international courts defer to varying degrees and through different modes. This chapter presents the book’s conceptual approach to studying deference and the core theoretical argument advanced by the book. In doing so, it distinguished the conceptual and theoretical framework from existing literature on international courts. It describes the research design that guides the empirical analysis and the logic behind the book’s focus on the East African Court of Justice, Caribbean Court of Justice, and the African Court of Human Rights. The chapter briefly summarizes the main findings and the implications of the book for future research.

The global fashion industry is increasingly subject to accusations of cultural appropriation. We analyse why the fashion industry’s practices – in particular, its mashup-magpie mode of creativity and its rapid innovation cycle – make it a frequent target of these claims. We explain the challenges to legal protection for cultural designs; explore and critique the normative case for property claims in traditional cultural designs; and offer a qualified defence of the industry’s practice of re-interpreting those designs. Throughout, we suggest that many designs seen as originating in a particular culture have roots that extend outward to other cultures; this network of cultural interchange often undermines any particular ownership claim. And while appropriation can signal disrespect for source cultures and be objectionable for that reason, appropriation is not disrespectful per se. Indeed, there are strong normative arguments supporting many instances of appropriation.

This chapter explores the challenges of applying human rights frameworks to the digital realm through the lens of non-coherence theory. This theory posits that human rights in the digital domain differ fundamentally from their offline counterparts owing to shifts in meaning, scope, and application. The chapter critically examines the assumption that offline human rights norms can be seamlessly transposed into the digital environment, highlighting the distortions and variances that arise in this process. It also delves into epistemological and ontological concerns, such as the relativity of human rights in the digital space, and introduces new conceptual frameworks such as the equilibrium of relative rights thesis. The chapter highlights discrepancies in how rights, such as privacy and dignity, manifest online compared with offline, arguing that these differences necessitate a rethinking of legal frameworks. The chapter challenges the traditional notion of absolute human rights, arguing that digital environments introduce a relativity that shifts the balance between competing rights (e.g., privacy versus freedom of expression).