MTTLR, like many journals, publishes content written by both students and scholars. Though articles written by scholars (professors, practitioners, judges, etc.) are generally considered more significant, student-written content has had a noticeable impact and has even been cited by courts. For example, the Federal Circuit recently rejected a claim that a method of hedging risk in the field of commodities trading was not patentable and that the machine-or-transformation test was applicable. The Court cited a MTTLR student note by Nicholas A. Smith, Business Method Patents and Their Limits: Justifications, History, and the Emergence of A Claim Construction Jurisprudence. In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943, 1004 n.8 (Fed. Cir. 2008). A California Court deciding a case about jurisdiction for an internet-based interstate case cited a student-written comment by Matthew Fagin, Regulating Speech Across Borders: Technology vs. Values. Hageseth v. Superior Court, 150 Cal. App. 4th 1399, 1423 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. 2007). Of course, non-student work certainly has an impact too. For example, A federal district court granting summary judgment for Microsoft on a patent claim cited an article by Martin Campbell-Kelly, Not All Bad: An Historical Perspective on Software Patents. Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97491, *3 (D.R.I. Oct. 19, 2007). The use of student-written work by courts demonstrates the continued importance of publishing such works.
