Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Clear But Unconvincing: The Federal Circuit’S Invalidity Standard, David O. Taylor
Clear But Unconvincing: The Federal Circuit’S Invalidity Standard, David O. Taylor
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
The Federal Circuit’s standard for proving invalidity of patent claims is clear. The Federal Circuit always requires clear and convincing evidence to prove that a patent claim is invalid. The rationale behind this standard, however, is unconvincing. There are significant reasons to believe that the Patent Office rarely considers the most relevant prior art and that, instead, alleged infringers often find prior art that is more relevant than the prior art considered by the Patent Office. It defies logic to apply the clear and convincing burden where the Patent Office considered only prior art that is less relevant than the …
Copyrighting Shakespeare: Jacob Tonson, Eighteenth Century English Copyright, And The Birth Of Shakespeare Scholarship, Jeffrey M. Gaba
Copyrighting Shakespeare: Jacob Tonson, Eighteenth Century English Copyright, And The Birth Of Shakespeare Scholarship, Jeffrey M. Gaba
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
In 1709, Jacob Tonson, the premier publisher of his age, purchased the “copyright” to Shakespeare. Tonson and his family over the next fifty years went on to publish some of the most significant editions of the collected works of Shakespeare, edited by the likes of Nicholas Rowe, Alexander Pope and Samuel Johnson. In many ways, the Tonsons were responsible for the growth of Shakespeare’s popularity and the critical study of his work.
This article discusses the significance of copyright to the Tonsons’ publication decisions. It suggests that the Tonson copyright did not significantly “encourage” their contributions to Shakespeare scholarship. First, …
Uspto Issues Supplementary Examination Guidelines Explaining The Requirement For Clarity In Patent Claims, W. Keith Robinson, Rouget Henschel
Uspto Issues Supplementary Examination Guidelines Explaining The Requirement For Clarity In Patent Claims, W. Keith Robinson, Rouget Henschel
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently published Supplementary Examination Guidelines on the requirement that proper patent claims must allow the public to clearly distinguish what infringes from what does not. The Guidelines focus to some degree on computer-implemented inventions. The Guidelines acknowledge that computer implemented inventions have “unique examination issues.” But the Guidelines are important to patent applicants in all fields, perhaps more so in newer technologies with developing terminology, or where the invention is otherwise difficult to put into words.
Current And Potential Methods To Undermine A Competitor’S U.S. Patent Application, W. Keith Robinson, M. Haq
Current And Potential Methods To Undermine A Competitor’S U.S. Patent Application, W. Keith Robinson, M. Haq
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
The current PTO procedures provide a few choices for a third party to influence the prosecution of a competitors patent application prior to issuance. In the case of protests and public use hearings, the third party may submit documents and explain their relevancy, but must know of the application’s existence prior to publication in order to meet the timeliness requirement. In the case of third-party submissions, the third party has a short two-month window post-publication, but cannot explain the relevancy of the documents submitted. In each case, the time frame within which a third party can act is extremely limited. …