Professor Fox Research Articles

An Interview with Robert Fox

The following interview with Professor Fox was conducted by Gildo Magalhães at the University of São Paulo’s Institute of Advanced Studies on November 16, 2017, with the participation of Raiany Oliveira, Flávio Magalhães, and Sara Albieri.

Dov Fox on Reproductive Negligence: A Commentary

This commentary offers three basic observations about Professor Dov Fox’s novel and illuminating conception of a new tort of reproductive negligence. In Reproductive Negligence, Professor Fox identifies three scenarios, categorically: imposition of unwanted parenthood, deprivation of wanted parenthood, and confounding of efforts to have expected traits. Drawing on these circumstances, Fox argues the case for a newly recognized tort of reproductive negligence that embraces all of these categories. My commentary proceeds as follows. From a historical perspective, Part I attempts to locate his claim for recognition of a more expansive version of recovery for stand-alone intangible harm in currently accepted tort duties. From a liability perspective, while finding much to be admired in this proposed new theory of recovery, Part II questions whether it is workable to view reproductive negligence as a single pathway rather than three distinct routes to recognizing new tort rights. And finally, from a damages perspective, Part III draws on expansive themes in other areas of recovery for intangible harm to suggest additional foundational support for Fox’s effort to push the frontier of recovery for intangible harm into new territory.

Citizen Fox: The Global Antitrust Vision of Eleanor Fox

This chapter will examine the growth of Professor Eleanor Fox’s global and cosmopolitan vision for the future of competition policy. Over her illustrious career, Professor Fox’s scholarship traces an arc that began with the battle for the soul of U.S. antitrust law as the Chicago School’s influence began to dominate the discourse, enforcement policy, and eventually the case law. At the same time, Professor Fox also participated in the vigorous debate over the extraterritorial application of U.S. law to international cartels, monopolies, and mergers. Perhaps as a result of the changes in U.S. antitrust law, Professor Fox became a prominent voice in analyzing EU competition law and explaining that system to U.S. and international audiences as the influence of the U.S. as the antitrust hegemon began to wane. EU competition law was a natural focus for her scholarship, given its more complete vision of competition law in numerous important ways that fascinated Professor Fox. In more recent times, Professor Fox has also focused on the proper level of governance for competition policy in a globalized economy. She has focused on issues of gaps, legitimacy, and sufficiency to argue that global problems deserve, and require, global solutions. Depending on the specific issue, she has argued for the use of true international instruments and institutions ranging from international codes, WTO rules for competition policy, cooperation, harmonization, technical assistance, world restatements, as well as other hard law and soft law solutions, to solve the familiar problems of national competition law being used to regulate global markets. What most distinguishes Professor Fox from most other scholars in the field is her cosmopolitanism, a willingness to look at competition issues through the lens of global welfare not tied to individual citizenship. While often controversial, this perspective has allowed Professor Fox to find creative solutions for historically intractable problems and maintain an unwavering moral compass in addressing competition policy as a means to address poverty, democracy, and economic justice for the have nots in the global economy. We salute these accomplishments and conclude by speculating on the future and the promise as well as the obstacles for the implementation of Professor Fox’s global vision.

A Profile of Keith Aa Fox, Cardiologist and Researcher

Professor Keith AA Fox speaks to Caroline Telfer, Commissioning Editor. Professor Keith AA Fox is the British Heart Foundation and the Duke of Edinburgh Professor of Cardiology at the University of Edinburgh (UK). He is a founding fellow of the European Society of Cardiology and is currently Chair of the Programme of the European Society of Cardiology. In addition, he was President of the British Cardiovascular Society from 2009 to 2012. Professor Fox gave the State-of-the-Art lecture on acute coronary syndromes at the American Heart Association, as well as the 2009 Plenary lecture at the European Society of Cardiology-American College of Cardiology Symposium, the Lord Rayner lecture of the Royal College of Physicians (London, UK) and the Sir Stanley Davidson Lecture of the Royal College (Edinburgh, UK). He was awarded the Silver Medal of the European Society of Cardiology in 2010. Professor Fox's major research interest lies in the mechanisms and manifestations of acute coronary arterial disease; his work extends from underlying biological mechanisms to in vitro and in vivo studies and clinical trials. He is the author of more than 587 scientific papers (H-index Web of Science 73, Citations: 30,261 to March 2013). Professor Fox is chairman of the RITA program, co-chairman of ROCKET-AF and OASIS program, and chair of the GRACE program (the largest multinational study in acute coronary syndromes), and a lead investigator for studies on novel antithrombins, anticoagulants and antiplatelets. He is an International Associate Editor of the European Heart Journal and a member of the editorial boards of a number of journals. His current areas of research include the inhibition of coronary thrombosis and the role of platelets and inflammation in acute coronary syndromes.

A quarter-century of The Knowledge Engineering Review: Introduction to the Special Issue

A quarter-century of <i>The Knowledge Engineering Review</i>: Introduction to the Special Issue

“Dear Mr. Whitworth/Dear Professor Fox”: Ode to an Editor and to Editing

Although in the course of my long academic career I had published eight books and many articles and essays, it was not until I became involved in writing an autobiographical account of my life as a sociologist that I had the experience of working intensively with a personal editor. From time to time I had wistfully, and rather romantically, wondered what it would be like to have an editor like the most fortunate of “real writers” do: an editor who had a close relationship to my manuscript, to the creative process by which it was coming into being, and to me; who understood my intentions; who was both critical and empathic; and who was endowed with the technical skill, the artistry, and the discernment to know what to do, and not to do, to make my writing better. However, in the spheres of academic journal and book publishing in which I moved, my contacts with editors had generally been confined to those aspects of their roles that pertained to the screening, review, and the so-called production of manuscripts, and to a limited form of copy editing, executed impersonally by someone who usually remained anonymous, and did not exhibit either a feeling for language or a masterly command of grammar.

SDT Presentation of Gold Medal—response by Professor Fox

SDT Presentation of Gold Medal—response by Professor Fox

Selective Disclosure by Issuers, Its Legality and Ex Ante Harm: Some Observations in Response to Professor Fox

Selective disclosure by issuers to analysts may sometimes violate rule 10b-5 if the issuer, as an entity, obtains an improper personal Uncertain is the stock price accuracy benefit of the insider trading resulting from selective disclosure. The interval between the trading and public disclosure may be too short to produce a significant economic benefit. Furthermore, if share prices are already quite far from their fundamental value, the insider trading may sometimes move prices farther away from accuracy. Are U.S. residents injured when a foreign issuer listed in the United States engages in selective disclosure that results in insider trading? The answer may be yes, both ex post and ex ante. Ex post, the insider trading injures preempted and/or induced traders, including Americans. Professor Fox argues that, ex ante, induced or preempted traders are not injured because share prices will discount both the risk of becoming a victim of an insider trade and any loss of liquidity caused by a widening of bid-ask spreads by market makers and specialists. Presumably, this discount will harm issuers by lowering the price at which they issue shares. Nevertheless, ex ante, insider trading may still harm preempted and/or induced traders if the market is unable to determine an appropriate discount for the risk of becoming a victim. Assume arguendo that the market is able to determine this discount. If the Commission forbids selective disclosure by foreign issuers, the discount will decline. The prohibition transfers wealth from insider trading tippees (probably foreigners) to all shareholders, including Americans. Even if some investors receive a windfall because they originally bought at a discount, the SEC may decide that insider trading profits are an even less deserved benefit. In addition, even if stock prices discount the risk of harm from insider trading, American investors would benefit from the decline in the uncertainty of injury that would result from a broad SEC prohibition of selective disclosure. Because the risk is associated with trading, not holding stocks, a diversified portfolio does not eliminate the risk (even assuming investors are diversified). Furthermore, even ex ante, frequent traders are disproportionately harmed by insider trading, again because the risk is associated with trading. One might argue that, because of the deterrence of excessive stock trading and speculation, the nation might actually benefit from an increase in bid-ask spreads and disproportionate harm to frequent traders. Nevertheless, the SEC may disagree. It may view its mission as encouraging securities trading in this country to improve the liquidity of the domestic stock market. If so, the Commission may wish to forbid selective disclosure by all issuers, both domestic and foreign. Such a prohibition would reduce both bid-ask spreads in this country and the uncertainty Americans face in becoming victims of a stock market insider trade. As a result, the liquidity of U.S. markets would increase. In short, selective disclosure by foreign issuers listed in the United States may harm Americans, both ex post and ex ante.

Selective Disclosure by Issuers, Its Legality and Ex Ante Harm: Some Observations in Response to Professor Fox

Selective disclosure by issuers to analysts may sometimes violate rule 10b-5 if the issuer, as an entity, obtains an improper personal Uncertain is the stock price accuracy benefit of the insider trading resulting from selective disclosure. The interval between the trading and public disclosure may be too short to produce a significant economic benefit. Furthermore, if share prices are already quite far from their fundamental value, the insider trading may sometimes move prices farther away from accuracy. Are U.S. residents injured when a foreign issuer listed in the United States engages in selective disclosure that results in insider trading? The answer may be yes, both ex post and ex ante. Ex post, the insider trading injures preempted and/or induced traders, including Americans. Professor Fox argues that, ex ante, induced or preempted traders are not injured because share prices will discount both the risk of becoming a victim of an insider trade and any loss of liquidity caused by a widening of bid-ask spreads by market makers and specialists. Presumably, this discount will harm issuers by lowering the price at which they issue shares. Nevertheless, ex ante, insider trading may still harm preempted and/or induced traders if the market is unable to determine an appropriate discount for the risk of becoming a victim. Assume arguendo that the market is able to determine this discount. If the Commission forbids selective disclosure by foreign issuers, the discount will decline. The prohibition transfers wealth from insider trading tippees (probably foreigners) to all shareholders, including Americans. Even if some investors receive a windfall because they originally bought at a discount, the SEC may decide that insider trading profits are an even less deserved benefit. In addition, even if stock prices discount the risk of harm from insider trading, American investors would benefit from the decline in the uncertainty of injury that would result from a broad SEC prohibition of selective disclosure. Because the risk is associated with trading, not holding stocks, a diversified portfolio does not eliminate the risk (even assuming investors are diversified). Furthermore, even ex ante, frequent traders are disproportionately harmed by insider trading, again because the risk is associated with trading. One might argue that, because of the deterrence of excessive stock trading and speculation, the nation might actually benefit from an increase in bid-ask spreads and disproportionate harm to frequent traders. Nevertheless, the SEC may disagree. It may view its mission as encouraging securities trading in this country to improve the liquidity of the domestic stock market. If so, the Commission may wish to forbid selective disclosure by all issuers, both domestic and foreign. Such a prohibition would reduce both bid-ask spreads in this country and the uncertainty Americans face in becoming victims of a stock market insider trade. As a result, the liquidity of U.S. markets would increase. In short, selective disclosure by foreign issuers listed in the United States may harm Americans, both ex post and ex ante.

Power and Illness: The Failure and Future of American Health Policy

Daniel M Fox University of California Press, $20, pp 191 ISBN 0-520-08409-8 The theme of Daniel M Fox's study of American health care policy is simple but radical in its implications, and not just for the United States. It is that health care institutions are shaped by history - specifically by the inherited stock of ideas about the nature of the medical task - and that, in turn, these institutions then create interest groups which impede adaptation to new challenges. To put it more concretely, Professor Fox's argument is that the main health problem in the US, as elsewhere, is the management of chronic conditions …

Prejudice Against Discrimination

(1992). Prejudice Against Discrimination. Psychological Inquiry: Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 184-186.

A Response to Professor Fox

In this Comment, Professors Weiss and White respond to a critique by Professor Merritt Fox of their earlier article Of Econometrics and Indeterminacy: A Study of Investors' Reactions to Changes in Corporate Law. In that article, the Authors conducted an econometric study of investors' reactions to seven recent Delaware court decisions. The results of that study led them to reassess the seven decisions and to question arguments that have been advanced by contract-oriented Professor Fox has criticized this work, stating that the Authors'primary evidenceabsence of market fluctuations following the courts' decisions-demonstrates only the inadequacy of market studies for this form of analysis. In this Comment, the Authors defend the use of market models and take exception to Fox's characterization of their methodology and conclusions. They conclude, however, that notwithstanding its undue formalism, Professor Fox's critique is not inconsistent with their own conclusions about the significance of their work for contract-oriented commentators.

A Response to Professor Fox

A Response to Professor Fox

Essays in Medical Sociology: Journeys into the Field

This outstanding collection of essays by Renee C. Fox encompasses almost thirty years of original, pioneering research in the sociology of medicine. Based on fieldwork in a variety of medical settings in the United States, Belgium, Zaire, these ethnographic essays examine chronic terminal illness, medical research, therapeutic innovation, medical education socialization, bio-ethics. Within this framework, three empirical cases have been singled out for special scrutiny--the process of becoming a physician, the development of the artificial kidney machine organ transplantation, the evolution of medical research in Belgium. Without ignoring social structural or psychodynamic factors, Dr. Fox has explored basic cultural phenomena questions associated with health, illness, medicine: values, beliefs, symbols, rites, the nuances of language: ethical existential dilemmas dualities; the complex interrelationships between medicine, science, religion, magic. She draws systematically imaginatively upon anthropological, psychological, historical, biological insights integrates observations analyses from her own studies in American, Western European, Central African societies. This second, augmented edition includes Professor Fox's more recent contributions to the expanding of the sociology of medicine. They are Evolution of Medical Uncertainty; The Human Condition of Health Professionals; Reflections on the Utah Artificial Heart Program; Is Religion Important in Belgium?; Medical Morality is Not Bioethics--Medical Ethics in China the United States; and Medicine, Science Technology. work also includes a new introduction, Endings, Beginnings Continuities. Now, anthropologists, sociologists, medical educators, scientists, researchers, students can join her on her journeys into the field share with her the priceless insights to be gained from the physicians, nurses, medical students, patients, their families, who are working, living, dying on the edge of what is known, scrutable, remediable--on the edge of medical science.

Insider Trading: Rule 10b-5, Disclosure, and Corporate Privacy: A Comment

Previous articleNext article No AccessInsider Trading: Rule 10b-5, Disclosure, and Corporate Privacy: A CommentJames H. LorieJames H. Lorie Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Legal Studies Volume 9, Number 4Dec., 1980The Law and Economics of Privacy Sponsored by The University of Chicago Law School Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/467666 Views: 7Total views on this site Citations: 3Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:William K.S. Wang Selective Disclosure by Issuers, Its Legality and Ex Ante Harm: Some Observations in Response to Professor Fox, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2002).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.302328William K.S. Wang Selective Disclosure by Issuers, Its Legality and Ex Ante Harm: Some Observations in Response to Professor Fox, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2001).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.287072NICHOLAS L. GEORGAKOPOULOS CLASSICAL AND CROSS INSIDER TRADING: VARIATIONS ON THE THEME OF RULE 10b?5, American Business Law Journal 28, no.11 (Mar 1990): 109–143.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1714.1990.tb00823.x

Obscenity

The project staff ofthe Prohibited and Regulated Conduct Project of the Law Reform Commission of Canada state that the uncertainty of the law of obscenity the unevenness of its interpretation and application throughout Canada, and the question of its relevanceasa constituent partofthe criminal law prompted this extensive considerationofwhether the existing law is in need of reform. In his introduction, Professor Fox elaborates on the two fundamental difficulties at the rootofthe problem: first, that obscenity is an inescapably subjective phenomenon; and second, the law's own indeterminacyofaim. He then scrutinizes the plethora of possible subjectmatterfor obscenity and its dissemination; and he proceeds to a consideration of whether the suspectmaterialis obsceneper seorvariable according to susceptibility of the audience. Six possible justifications are offered for legislative prohibitions on obscenity; eachofthese areveryclosely examined and most are found to be tenuous at best. After a rather detailed examination of the cases on the Criminal Code provisions, other Federal legislation touching on the subject of obscenity, and the necessaril11 incidental consideration of defenses and expert witnesses, Professor Fox weighs the possible alternatives to the present law. There cannot, of course, be any definitive answers.

The case of the pulled plasterboard

Professor Fox describes, in refreshingly frank detail, some of the critical marketing factors used to motivate the construction industry to adopt a new gypsum plasterboard. A case study is presented which explains the product's innovatory properties, the marketing objectives, the pricing strategy, the initial and final promotion programs. Of great pedagogical significance is the fact that the reader is treated to an account of a marketing program which ended in failure; despite the apparent potential of a billion-dollar market in which a few large companies sold a conventional product to a multitude of industrial users.

When Human Relations May Succeed and the Company Fail

The inappropriate use of human relations in industry can do much more harm than good; Professor Fox discusses five such situations. Then he examines briefly certain prerequisites for the successful utilization of human relations in a company.