To compare and classify objects on the basis of quantitative indicators is nothing new. Bereft of any direct subjectivity, the quantified method of assessing quality may be a useful tool to avoid or reduce any bias or other forms of human frailties in the assessment. However, the effort to assess the quality of academic output with quantifiable metrics is perhaps a relatively new but increasingly common phenomenon. This article argues that while some higher education rankings can serve laudable purposes, such as sending signals to aspiring students and other stakeholders and giving institutions an opportunity for introspecting on their affairs, the ranking of research outputs on quantifiable metrics alone is an inherently hazardous task. Rankings may be used as an indicium of quality; however, they cannot and should not be the sole proxy for assessing the quality of scholarly outputs. Another main argument of the article is that the university-wide “one size fits all” metric should exhibit more deference to discipline-specific norms, such as law.

The proliferation of satellite technology has ushered in an era of opportunity and challenge for the existing international legal framework of space law. International regulatory bodies have looked to existing treaties governing space activities like the Outer Space Treaty, the Liability Convention, and the Registration Convention. In this new era, the challenges that have emerged cannot be enforced by the broad language of the treaties and outdated terms. For example, the deployment of large constellations of smaller satellites poses new challenges, like orbital debris damage and evasive responsibility, which the legal landscape for outer space must address. Space law stresses geopolitical considerations and strategic international legal frameworks that work to reduce the militarization of space and ensure that space is for all. This paper explores current treaties and challenges and proposes legal and policy solutions for the satellite industry’s responsible use of outer space.

Established in 2015 by Royal Charter, the Jigme Singye Wangchuck School of Law (JSW Law) opened to students in 2017 and is Bhutan’s only law school. This article describes the author’s journey in establishing JSW Law’s library. From earning an MLIS to finalizing construction plans and purchasing materials, the author’s journey was complex and challenging. However, the JSW Law Library is now open and provides faculty and students with a modern space for research and study.

In the digital age, “commercial sharenting” refers to parents excessively sharing their children’s images and data on social media for profit. Initially motivated by parental pride, this practice is now driven by child-to-child marketing, where young influencers shape their peers’ consumption habits. While regulations protect child influencers’ privacy, a significant gap remains regarding the rights of child viewers. We argue that commercial sharenting threatens children’s right to health under Article 24(1) of the UNCRC, potentially leading to harmful consumer behaviors and identity confusion. In response, China has adopted a fragmented regulatory approach to platform liability. This article advocates for a comprehensive legal framework incorporating content filtering, moderation, and reviewal to regulate commercial sharenting and safeguard children’s rights and interests in China.

This article describes and examines six decades of the study of Asian laws around the world to construct a global map of the field. It demonstrates that Asian legal studies have been increasingly institutionalized, as evident in the global proliferation of centers, programs, associations, book series, journals, and courses. Substantively, Asian laws scholarship has grown into a sophisticated system of varied learning, including jurisprudence, legal history, comparative law, law and society, law and economics, and international law.

The institutional and substantive development of Asian legal studies follows a few common patterns corresponding to legal, social, and economic developments in the region. These include the formation of Asian legal studies during the post-World War II and post-colonial period between the 1950s and 1970s; its transition during the post-Cold War period between the 1980s and 1990s; and the transformation of the field in the context of globalization in the 21st century, projected as the “Asian century.”

Global studies in Asian laws are driven by both a deontological search for new knowledge and the instrumental necessity for a wide range of international, national, and individual actors. Instrumentalism, however, tends to play a stronger role in shaping Asian legal studies, and this pushes the focus toward large and developed jurisdictions and emphasis on contemporary legal issues.

As a consequence, Asian legal studies as a discipline displays two opposite trends: integration and differentiation. On the one hand, various specific areas of Asian laws deal with common cross-cutting themes, including religion, colonialism, pluralism, authoritarianism, and development, which renders them integral parts of the larger system. On the other hand, as the scholarship has grown to a greater level of complexity, disciplinary balkanization has become discernible. Different areas of Asian laws have different institutional, theoretical, and methodological underpinnings.

The future development of Asian legal studies requires the inclusive study of different areas of the laws of different Asian peoples. This inclusivity is premised on a balance of the considerations of necessity and the intrinsic pursuit of knowledge of Asian laws.

This column was born out of curiosity and community. Inspired by the many conversations and shared experiences of colleagues and friends at gatherings of the International Association of Law Libraries (IALL) and other law library organizations around the world, it seeks to explore the ever-evolving roles we play in the legal community.

This paper comprises a brief study of a law firm library in Malaysia, which has utilized an automated library system to organize its collection. The paper aims to demonstrate how the automated library system was implemented and to identify the statistics that can be generated through that system. The particular software used is the Applied Library System (ALS).

This article discusses European copyright law as applied to the development and training of generative AI and natural language processing in public interest research institutions and libraries. The article focuses on the scope of the new exceptions from copyright law for text and data mining (TDM) for research purposes and discusses them from the perspective of research ethics and principles of open science in publicly financed research. The public interest mission of research institutions and libraries includes the open dissemination of research results but the exceptions from copyright are focused only on the training phase in AI development. Regulation on data transparency is fragmented. The article finds that while new exceptions open for developing language models under research institutions and libraries’ public interest mission to preserve national languages, the regulation is not adapted to principles of research ethics and open science, and legal uncertainty remains.