Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Is It Time For A Rule 11 For The Patent Bar?, Ralph D. Clifford
Is It Time For A Rule 11 For The Patent Bar?, Ralph D. Clifford
Faculty Publications
The failure to require the patent bar to be completely candid in its dealings with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) is one of the reasons behind the patent quality problem in the United States. Although PTO regulations impose a duty of candor on both the patent applicant and his or he attorney, this duty of disclosure is limited to matters already known by the parties. The regulations impose no duty to become educated about the technology that underlies a claimed invention. Indeed, there are rational reasons why a patent applicant might seek an uneducated attorney and order him …
A Statistical Analysis Of The Patent Bar: Where Are The Software-Savvy Patent Attorneys?, Ralph D. Clifford, Thomas G. Field Jr., Jon R. Cavicchi
A Statistical Analysis Of The Patent Bar: Where Are The Software-Savvy Patent Attorneys?, Ralph D. Clifford, Thomas G. Field Jr., Jon R. Cavicchi
Faculty Publications
Among the many factors that impact the declining quality of U.S. patents is the increasing disconnect between the technological education patent bar members have and the fields in which patents are being written. Based on an empirical study, the authors show that too few patent attorneys and agents have relevant experience in the most often patented areas today, such as computer science. An examination of the qualification practices of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) suggests that an institutional bias exists within the PTO that prevents software-savvy individuals from registering with the Office. This paper concludes with suggestions of …
Random Numbers, Chaos Theory, And Cogitation: A Search For The Minimal Creativity Standard In Copyright Law, Ralph D. Clifford
Random Numbers, Chaos Theory, And Cogitation: A Search For The Minimal Creativity Standard In Copyright Law, Ralph D. Clifford
Faculty Publications
This article explores the second type of expressive work, those where there is a question if the author’s contribution is qualitatively sufficient, to determine how much creativity and of what type is required to sustain a copyright. Initially, the historic standards of creativity use before Fiest was decided in 1991 will be presented. Then, after a brief discussion of Fiest, the scientific basis of creativity will be explored. Next, the confusion regarding creativity that exists in the lower courts will serve to expose the source of misapplication of the law – a disconnect between how courts perceive creativity and …