Show simple item record

Fairness and Secrecy

dc.contributor.authorChamberlin, John R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorScheppele, Kimen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-14T14:01:43Z
dc.date.available2010-04-14T14:01:43Z
dc.date.issued1991en_US
dc.identifier.citationCHAMBERLIN, JOHN; SCHEPPELE, KIM (1991). "Fairness and Secrecy." Rationality and Society 1(3): 6-34. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/68821>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1043-4631en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/68821
dc.description.abstractThis article examines the law pertaining to secrecy in contractual bargaining and argues that courts decide cases more consistently with contractarian principles than with economic ones. The economic theory of law claims that courts ought to require people to disclose secret information when that information was acquired as a by-product of other productive activity and to allow people to keep information secret when it was the product of significant investment. The contractarian theory argues that courts ought to (a) protect people from catastrophic losses, (b) require disclosure of secrets whose existence is not known to others, and (c) allow bargainers to keep visible secrets provided that their bargaining partners face roughly equal costs of acquiring the same information. A model is developed that specifies the effects of various information asymmetries in bargaining and shows how the courts focus on correcting the sorts of asymmetries that a contractarian would worry about rather than on correcting those asymmetries that an economic analyst would find most important.en_US
dc.format.extent3108 bytes
dc.format.extent2694776 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherSAGE Publicationsen_US
dc.titleFairness and Secrecyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelSociologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68821/2/10.1177_1043463191003001003.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/1043463191003001003en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBower, George Spencer. 1915. The law relating to actionable nondisclosure and other breaches of duty in relations of confidence and influence. London: Butterworths.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCoase, Ronald. 1960. The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics3:1-44.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrolich, Norman, Joe A. Oppenheimer, and Cheryl L. Eavey. 1987a. Choice of principles of distributive justice in experimental groups. American Journal of Political Science31:606.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrolich, Norman, Joe A. Oppenheimer, and Cheryl L. Eavey. 1987b. Laboratory results on Rawls's distributive justice. British Journal of Political Science17:1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKronman, Anthony. 1978. Mistake, disclosure, information and the law of contracts. Journal of Legal Studies7:1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePosner, Richard A. 1986. The economic analysis of law. 3d ed.Boston: Little, Brown.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRawls, John. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScheppele, Kim Lane. 1988. Legal secrets: Efficiency and equality in the common law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVerplanck, Gulian. 1825. An essay on the doctrine of contracts: Being an inquiry how contracts are affected in law and morals by concealment, error or inadequate price. New York: Caruill.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.