Engineering Law

About Engineering Law (GE 400)

Engineering Law provides soon-to-be engineers with an introductory understanding of the legal framework under which they will work. That is, all engineering is performed under the constraints imposed by our society’s laws and must take those laws into account.

The course has been designed with the following goals in mind:

1) Give students a greater understanding of their and their company’s position relative to the law so that they can act and talk more intelligently on the subject and be a better asset for their company.

2) Highlight a few areas that often trip up people in industry so that students can avoid the pitfalls or raise a concern if their company seems like it might have some exposure.

3) Help students know when their company has a potential or actual legal problem and should call a lawyer.

Please note that this is merely an introductory class. This class will not make you a lawyer. You are advised to seek legal representation if and when you or your company encounters a legal issue.

            Substantively, the class is divided into three sections:
            1) Basics of the legal system including sources of law and enforcing laws and agreements in court,
            2) Contracts and Torts, and
            3) Intellectual Property.

Spring 2012 Syllabus

Class #	Date	Read Before Class Note: You do not need to read the class 1 materials before class 1, but read the other materials before their respective classes. Materials may be posted as late as the night before class. MR = "Must Read" = Required Reading, all other readings are Recommended	Class Topic
1	Jan 19	Gayton, Chapter 3 U.S. Constitution, Link 2 (MR) Articles of Confederation Bill Of Rights (MR) Marbury v. Madison (MR) Calder v. Bull Martin v. Hunter's Lessee Cooper v. Aaron Commerce Clause (MR) Court Packing NLRB v. Jones US v. Darby Daniel v. Paul US v. Lopez US v. Morrison NSA Unconstitutional Wiretapping National Security Letters George Washington's Farewell Address Congress (MR) House - Legislative Process Library of Congress - Lawmaking How Congress Makes Laws (MR) Lobbying (MR) Center For Responsive Politics Pocket Veto (MR) Executive Orders (MR) Executive Order List Executive Order 9066 Signing Statements US Treaties (MR) Missouri v. Holland United States Code (USC) Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) SBIR State Constitutions Illinois Constitution (MR) Illinois Constitution 2 Illinois Constitutional Convention Toyota Plant Article Motorola Article	Engineering Law Overview I. Basics of the Legal System A. Sources of Law 1. Constitutional Law 2. Federal Statutes 3. Treaties 4 State Constitution 5. State Laws CLASS 1 LECTURE NOTES
2	Jan 26	Gayton, Chapters 3, 23 Agencies In General (MR) Federal Agencies List (MR) Independent Agencies (MR) Executive Departments (MR) Administrative Procedure Act (MR) Agency Rulemaking (MR) Federal Register (MR) PTO KSR Regs Tafas v. Dudas Tafas v. Kappos In re Bilski FCC Obscenity Regs Struck Down Professional Engineer (MR) Illinois Div. of Prof. Reg. Prof. Engineering Practice Act (MR) IL Administrative Code Standards Organization (MR) MPEG LA IEEE Standards IEEE Standards Development (MR) Justice Dept - Standards Guidelines (MR) Rambus JEDEC Employee Handbook (MR) Sample Employee Handbook	I. Basics of the Legal System A. Sources of Law 6. Agencies – Federal and State 7. Professional Licensing 8. Standards Setting Bodies 9. Company Policy CLASS 2 LECTURE NOTES
3	Feb 2	Gayton, Chapter 4 Federal District Court (MR) Northern District of Illinois 1 Northern District of Illinois 2 Central District of Illinois 1 Central District of Illinois 2 Federal Appeals Court (MR) U.S. Supreme Court (MR) Certiorari (MR) Evans Act State Courts (MR) State vs. Federal Court Comparison (MR) Circuit Court of Cook County (MR) Bankruptcy Court US Federal Courts Anatomy of a Lawsuit (MR) FRCP (MR) FRE (MR) Rule 11 (MR) Pre-Filing Investigation (MR) Sanctions (MR) Jurisdiction (MR) Federal Question Jurisdiction (MR) Diversity Jurisdiction (MR) USC - Diversity Supplemental Jurisdiction Minimum Contacts Illinois Constitution - Judiciary Illinois Supreme Court Illinois Judicial Elections Illinois Judicial Election Spending	I. Basics of the Legal System B. The Court System – Enforcing Laws and Agreements 1. Structure of the Court System a. Federal b. State 2. Anatomy of a Lawsuit 3. Complaint 4. Jurisdiction and Venue CLASS 3 LECTURE NOTES
4	Feb 9	Gayton, Chapter 4 Venue (MR) Answer (MR) FRCP 4 (MR) FRCP 12 Motions (MR) Affirmative Defenses (MR) Counterclaims (MR) Discovery (MR) Interrogatories (MR) Deposition (MR) Settlement Article NY Times Artcle on Settlement (MR) Settling Better Than Trial (MR) Summary Judgment (MR) Motions in Limine (MR) Bench Trial (MR) Jury Trial (MR) Trial (MR) Voir Dire (MR) Direct Examination (MR) Cross Examination (MR) Re-Direct Examination (MR) Burden of Proof (MR) Hearsay (MR) JMOL (MR) Judgment/Verdict (MR) Injunction (MR) Damages (MR) Attorney's Fees (MR) Declaratory Judgment (MR) Jury Nullification (MR) Appeal (MR)	I. Basics of the Legal System B. The Court System – Enforcing Laws and Agreements 5. Answer 6. Discovery 7. Settlement 8. Trial 9. Appeal 10. Injunctions CLASS 4 LECTURE NOTES
5	Feb 16	Gayton, Chapters 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Contract (MR) Restatment of Contracts 1 (MR) Restatment of Contracts 2 UCC 1 (MR) UCC 2 Capacity (MR) Offer and Acceptance (MR) EXAM #1 - Second Half of Class On Class 1-4 Materials	II. Contracts A. Introduction to Contracts B. Parties C. Offer and Acceptance CLASS 5 LECTURE NOTES EXAM #1 - Second Half of Class On Class 1-4 Materials
6	Feb 23	Review Exam #1 Gayton, Chapters 10, 11, 13, 14 Ultra Vires (MR) Corporate Veil (MR) Contract (MR) Mistake (MR) Misrepresentation (MR) Fraud (MR) Duress (MR) Undue Influence (MR) Consideration (MR) Promissory Estoppel (MR) Unclean Hands (MR) Non-Compete (MR)	II. Contracts D. Mistake, Misrepresentation, and Fraud E. Duress and Undue Influence F. Consideration CLASS 6 LECTURE NOTES
7	Mar 1	Gayton, Chapters 15, 21 Staute of Frauds (MR) Blue-pencil (MR) Bankruptcy (MR) Warranty (MR) Implied Warranty (MR)	II. Contracts G. Enforceability 1. Statute of Frauds 2. Lawful Subject Matter H. Performance, Breach, and Remedies I. Warranties CLASS 7 LECTURE NOTES

8	Mar 8	Gayton, Chapter 21 Torts (MR) Intentional Torts (MR) Assault (MR) Battery (MR) False Imprisonment (MR) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (MR) Negligence (MR) Duty of Care (MR) Standard of Care (MR) Proximate Cause (MR) Res Ipsa Loquitur (MR) Assumption of Risk (MR) Contributory Negligence (MR) Comparative Negligence (MR) Trespass (MR) Trespass to Land (MR) Trespass to Chattels (MR) Conversion (MR) Replevin Trover	III. Torts A. Intentional Torts B. Negligence CLASS 8 LECTURE NOTES
9	Mar 15	Gayton, Chapter 22 Fraud (MR) Negligent Misrepresentation (MR) Tortious Interference (MR) False Advertising (MR) Let The Weiner Wars Begin Food Words FDA Nutritional Claims Hershey Chocolate Article Types of Chocolate Reebok Shoes TWC vs. DirectTV Products Liability (MR)	III. Torts C. Fraud D. False Advertising E. Products Liability CLASS 9 LECTURE NOTES
10	Mar 29	Gayton, Chapter 20 Intellectual Property (MR) Ancient Brain Surgery Letters Patent Patent (MR) Copyright (MR) Trademark (MR) EXAM #2 - Second Half of Class On Class 5-9 Materials	IV. Intellectual Property A. Overview and Theory of Intellectual Property 1. US Rights 2. Foreign Rights 3. Function vs. Expression CLASS 10 LECTURE NOTES EXAM #2 - Second Half of Class On Class 5-9 Materials
11	April 5	Review Exam #2 Gayton, Chapter 20 Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Application (MR) Patenting Process (MR) US Pat. No. 7,753,421 US Pat. No. 7,017,598 US Pat. App. Pub No. US 2004/0221883 US Pat. No. 5,871,783 Statutory Subject Matter (MR) Bilski (MR) Barich Bilski Paper Novelty (MR) Non-Obviousness (MR) Patent Do's and D'oh! (MR) Sufficiency Of Disclosure (MR) Patent Claim (MR) Novelty vs. Non-Infringment America Invents Act (AIA) Text of AIA IPO AIA Comparison Chart Design Patent (MR) D595,574 D599,372	IV. Intellectual Property B. Patents 1. The Patenting Process 2. Review of Sample Patents 3. Patentable Subject Matter 4. Novelty 5. Non-Obviousness 6. 35 U.S.C. Sec. 112 7. Claim Types 8. Novelty vs. Infringement Analysis 9. Design Patents CLASS 11 LECTURE NOTES
12	April 12	Gayton, Chapter 20 Copyright (MR) 17 USC Copyright Office How To E-File Copyright Copyright Infringment (MR) Sony Case DMCA Napster Case Grokster	IV. Intellectual Property C. Copyrights CLASS 12 LECTURE NOTES
13	April 19	Gayton, Chapter 20 Trademark (MR) Unregistered Trademark (MR) Service Mark Lanham Act USC TM laws Trademark Fair Use (MR) Genericized Trademark (MR) PTO's TESS	IV. Intellectual Property D. Trademarks CLASS 13 LECTURE NOTES
14	April 26	EXAM #3 - Second Half of Class On Class 10-14 Materials	V. Engineering Work In A Legal Context CLASS 14 LECTURE NOTES EXAM #3 - Second Half of Class On Class 10-14 Materials

Spring 2011 Student Comments and Suggestions

Overall Comments
It has been a pleasure to teach you in this course and I am glad that you are learning and enjoying the course. I take all comments seriously because I want to deliver the highest quality and most enjoyable course that I can. Thank you for giving me feedback. If you have any further suggestions, I would be happy to hear them.

On a 5-point scale and with 47 completed forms, when asked to "Rate The Instructor's Overall Teaching Effectiveness" the students gave me a median ranking of 4.9/5.0. When asked to "Rate The Overall Quality Of This Course" the students gave the course a median ranking of 4.8/5.0. Those are the same high rankings that I got in the Fall 2010 when the course was named "Outstanding" by the Center for Teaching Excellence. I am glad that I am able to deliver an appealing course! I am also happy to again be ranked as "Outstanding" in the "List Of Teachers Ranked As Excellent By Their Students, Spring 2011".

Below I will summarize some positives that people mentioned as well as some suggestions for the future.

Summary of Positives

Real world applicability

Most students cited the real world applicability of the course and the potential usefulness of the course for their future careers as extremely positive.

Fair grading

Students resoundingly found the grading to be fair. We review all quiz and exam questions in class (except for Exam #3), so students can learn. The grading criteria are also clear. It's not necessarily an easy course and requires student to apply what they have learned, but because each question gets reviewed and explained, students will know why they got an individual question wrong and hopefully how to get it right in practice (See "Real world applicability", above).

The Instructor's Knowledge, Enthusiasm, and Vocal Delivery

Thanks for all the great comments! I am glad that my enthusiasm for the subject matter shines through. I note that out of 47 reviews, every single one rated my "vocal delivery" as 5/5. I am glad that I could make the course enjoyable for you.

Finally, before I finish this section, I have to leave you with a student comment that almost made me choke on my Dr. Pepper. In response to "What do you suggest to improve this course", one student wrote "More Joe Barich ... and cowbell!" Well, I'm no Christopher Walken, but I do my best!

Suggestions For The Future

Better book

About 10 people commented that they either did not like the book or thought that it was extraneous when compared to the lectures and the online links. That's a significant number and this comment has cropped up before. After it was mentioned last semester, I again reviewed the books that are offered for Engineering Law and I again arrived at my previous conclusion. The book is not perfect, but it is the best of what's out there. Here are some issues: 1) It's tough for an Engineering Law book to be right on the money with the subjects that we want and for the coverage to be the depth that we want and in a practical style as opposed to fluff or a legal casebook - which is really no fun; 2) For some people, the book is probably a waste, but for others I think that they would feel lost if they did not have the book to provide them with structure; and 3) We seem to have varying levels of knowledge in the course - the book seems more useful for those approaching the material for the first time as opposed to those that have already had an introduction and have a working framework. For now, I am going to keep the book as Required Reading - although what I really want to "require" is that people learn the basic information in it, and if people already know that info then I am OK with them skipping reading the book. However, for those that need more framework, the book is there. Of course, if anyone has a different book that they would like me to consider, I am open to considering it.

More homework

Another repeat comment (by about 5 people this time). Again I am flattered by people's desire to learn! Also, there is a lot of reading from the books and links. However, I have been trying to envision the form that this homework might take. There are a couple of issues, though. First, we have 14 class meetings, 5 quizzes and 3 exams. Consequently, you are already being tested in 8/14 class meetings. I would assume that students would only want homework to be due in classes where there is no exam? Also, I would probably think that the homework should be something other than multiple choice questions. It also can't be too complicated because this legal stuff gets difficult pretty quick. I would also think that it should not be graded - or maybe count for a small number of extra points. I also note that people really like the real-world aspects. Hmmm. Maybe I could come up with about 3 real-world examples and give them to the class to do as a thought experiment? Students would then write out the answer and turn it in for 1 quiz point if you turn it in, 2 quiz points if it is completely right? Maybe one with regard to laws, one contracts, and one IP? If you made this comment, please let me know what you think of the above. Thanks!

Lecture multiple times per week rather in one stretch

While students enjoyed the lecture, the 2.5 hours were taxing for some. I am very sympathetic and I try to make the lecture as enjoyable as possible. If I were based in Champaign, I would be happy to break up the lecture, but being based in Chicago means that every trip down to Urbana is 5-6 hours of driving round-trip. Perhaps one day I will be able to break up the lecture, but it's just not possible right now.

Make the course count as a technical elective outside of GE/IE

I was not aware of it, but apparently GE 400 counts as a techical elective in GE/IE, but does not count as a technical elective for at least some other engineering majors. Several non-GE/IE students expressed their desire to have that changed. I looked into this and sent a communication to a non-GE/IE department to initiate a dialog. We will see where we go from there.

Fall 2010 Student Comments About Engineering Law

Joe's efforts in teaching Engineering Law have earned him inclusion in the "List Of Teachers Ranked As Excellent By Their Students, Fall 2010" as released by the University of Illinois Center For Teaching Excellence. The asterisk by his name indicates that "the instructor ratings were outstanding" in that Joe was ranked in the top 10% for both Overall Teaching Effectiveness and Overall Quality of the Course. No other Professor in the Industrial & Enterprise Systems Engineering Department was rated outstanding - although 3 TAs in the department were rated outstanding.

- Highlights

NOTE: On a 5-point scale and with 40+ students in the course, when asked to "Rate The Instructor's Overall Teaching Effectiveness" the students gave me a median ranking of 4.9/5.0. When asked to "Rate The Overall Quality Of This Course" the students gave the course a median ranking of 4.8/5.0.

[T]hanks for a great semester. This was the most fair class I've ever been in and it really helps to create an environment for true learning as opposed to simply passing tests. Your teaching style and the overall structure of the class was a breath of fresh air in this engineering department. Thanks again.

By far the best engineering professor I’ve had. Great content, awesome attitude and enthusiasm, and incredibly fair. Out of my entire GE curriculum, I think this has been the single most useful course I’ve taken. Keep up the good work! Your fairness and enthusiasm don’t go unnoticed.

This was one of my favorite classes by far and a class that I thoroughly enjoyed and that is not something I say often about classes. I particularly enjoyed the stories you would share and your personal insights into the laws and structure of the US system. Thanks for a great class, it is surprisingly rare how few classes actually excite me as a student and the law certainly was able to do that.

Can you teach all my classes?

Thanks for teaching! You were Awesome!

Best teacher yet, made me want to come to class

- Major strengths and weaknesses of instructor?

Really interesting! Loved the movie references. Great stories

Strength: Keeps students interested with good presentation of the material

Keeps interest up, great vocal delivery. Helpful in conflicts.

Strengths – Makes it fun!

Very clear presentation. I liked the jokes and humor.

The FIRST class I’ve had where the professor truly inspires me to learn the material. Keeps my attention very well.

Very good course organization, vocal delivery great. No weaknesses as a teacher, great job this semester.

Very knowledgeable on the subject matter, well organized, willing to explain and stay after to help. Obviously enjoys teaching the material.

Always engaging when speaking to the class.

Great guy. Makes class enjoyable to attend.

Animated, intelligent, relevant.

Excellent teacher! Enthusiastic, brilliant, funny, and experienced. Made this the best class of the semester.

Very knowledgeable, engaging, and enthusiastic.

Very good lecturer. Handouts very helpful. Great course!

Barich is one of the best lecturers on campus.

Man, you are just awesome.

Strengths: Excellent job, presented material well, enthusiastic, very knowledgeable.

He cares a lot about teaching well. He wants feedback and is willing to change for the better.

Best Professor I have ever had. No weakness.

Barich was a pleasure to have as a teacher. Very interesting and fun, and was always happy to stimulate extra learning and knowledge.

- What aspects of the course were most beneficial to you?

Learning about the legal structure in which we are required to operate.

I learned a lot and I really feel I will use this knowledge later in life.

Great general knowledge. Seems useful.

Legal responsibilities of an engineer.

A basic understand of law applicable to engineering, namely contract law.

I think every Engineering student should take this course, it is real-world knowledge that I’m so happy to know.

Excellent survey into variety of law and business topics. I will use this knowledge.

Intro to American legal system

Taught us not to do stupid things when it comes to contracts.

It was all stuff I didn’t know anything about before.

Legal Basics that could help you out big time in the Future

The presentations and supplements the instructor provided online.

Instructor was very enthusiastic/passionate towards material which was very beneficial in learning.

Everything.

Very useful class for engineers.

Great lectures. Really learned a lot.

- Suggestions to improve the course.

Nothing. Best course I’ve taken at U of I. First course I’ve taken where I will actually use what I learned.

Not much, it is well organized and well taught.

Don’t change it!

Course is pretty much perfect.

Joe's NOTE: Although the overwhelming majority of comments were along the lines of those above, I wanted to address a couple of concerns that were specifically raised:

1) In general it appears that students liked the lectures and supplemental materials, but some students did not think that the book was useful. (Commented by 5 students).

Joe’s Comment: I agree with you that the book is not perfect. However, I have actually looked at every book that I could find (around 10-15 different books) trying to find the perfect book for the course and I can tell you with certainty that the Gayton book was the best one that I saw.

There are several problems that many of the books run into. One problem is that it is pretty tough to write a book on law for non-lawyers that still provides the reader with information that they can use. Several books went more the “legal casebook” route where they concentrate too much on case law and become less useful for engineering undergrads. Other books were too lightweight and provided little usable information.

Additionally, we need a text that covers many different subjects – not just contract law, for example – and few books written for non-lawyers have that kind of breadth. Finally, several engineering law books were more exclusively focused on the civil engineering side of engineering law (bidding on bridge building, working with the architect, etc.) rather than the more broadly applicable aspects of 1) the legal system, 2) contracts and torts, and 3) intellectual property.

Conversely, the Gayton book at least touches on each of these areas, and does so in a pretty structured way. I also worry that some students will feel lost if I just provide them with links. If you have another text that you would like me to review, I would be happy to do so. Until then, Gayton is the best that I’ve got!

2) Incorporate videos into the slides. (Commented by 3 students).

Joe’s Comment: Of course! This is Gen Y we are talking about here! However, now that I think about it, I am kind of at a loss as to 1) the specific point in the lectures where the videos would go, and 2) what they would show. What kind of video would I show to help demonstrate the statuary limitations on copyright, for example? I would really appreciate any specific suggestions that you might have. I am always interested in improving the learning materials.

3) Assign out of class assignments/homework. (Commented by 3 students).

Joe’s Comment: I really enjoy that you want to learn more! My thought on the class was that there was a significant amount of reading (likely several hours) that I was already making you do outside of class between the Gayton text and the links on the website. I viewed that reading as the out of class assignment/homework. I recognize now that it did not conform to the pattern in other engineering classes where you would be doing problems and turning them in to the Professor for grading. However, it’s actually pretty typical for a law class. I will think further on it and see if I can come up with some out-of-class exercises to try out in the future.

- Comment on the grading procedures and exams.

Very fair, much emphasis on learning the material.

Very fair, gives students a chance to voice their opinions of fairness.

Perfectly fair.

Patent and Engineering Law

With Joe Barich