Law Commons^™

Comment: Perceptions Of Chief Patent Counsel At Large Corporations Of The Effects Of Patent Term, Products Liability And Government Regulations On Firm R&D, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

Last summer, over 300 members of the Association of (chief) Corporate Patent Counsel were surveyed concerning their attitude toward and experience with arbitration and mediation (ADR). Seventy-five responded. Subsequently, tabulations of the survey data were sent to the same people with four additional questions, two of which had nothing to do with ADR. Forty-one responded. This comment reports responses to the two questions unrelated to ADR.

Pharmaceuticals And Intellectual Property: Meeting Needs Throughout The World, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

To the extent that most people think about patents and other forms of intellectual property at all, they tend to be aware that the owners of such property may have the legal capacity to limit market entry--without fully appreciating the extent to which products or processes that can be easily copied might otherwise be unavailable. Focusing on their function in recouping risk capital, this article will survey the types and functions of intellectual property. Then it will attend to the situation in developing countries, particularly the role of intellectual property in meeting their needs for medical products.

Law And Fact In Patent Litigation: Form Versus Function, Thomas G. Field Jr

Law Faculty Scholarship

Recently, the Supreme Court sent Dennison Mfg. v. Panduit Corp. back to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). It remanded with explicit directions that the lower court consider the extent to which Rule 52(a) governs appellate review of determinations of obviousness.

It is by no means certain that obviousness determinations should be treated as questions of law. Nevertheless, there is ample evidence that courts seek to review findings of obviousness (or nonobviousness) more intensely than would be appropriate under the "clearly erroneous" or "substantial evidence" standards. If the courts are inclined to persist in more intense review …

Brief Survey Of And Proposal For Better Reconciliation Of The Options In Patent, Trademark, Copyright And Related Law, Thomas G. Field Jr

Law Faculty Scholarship

Taking up trademarks, patents, copyrights, and trade secrets (in that order), [this article] will attempt to summarize briefly the ways in which such rights arise, are perfected, and are enforced. It will also discuss a hypothetical in which all of these options will be discussed in a comparative way. Finally, it will suggest that basic improvements in the area could be realized by dispensing with the often confusing and arbitrary subject matter distinctions which characterize the various subparts of the present intellectual property system.

Patent Arbitration: Past, Present And Future, Thomas G. Field Jr

Law Faculty Scholarship

Most attorneys have heard of arbitration, but few have more than a vague idea of what it is or have any experience with it. Patent attorneys are no exception, and many are no doubt wondering about the implications of §294. It was enacted in August of 1982, and went into effect in February 1983: Why was it needed and passed, and what does it mean?

Post Hoc Evaluations Of Obviousness: Preliminary Report Of An Attempt To Identify, Empirically, The Characteristics Of A Superior Evaluator, Juanita V. Field, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

Over a century and a quarter have passed since the Supreme Court in Hotchkiss v. Greenwood held that more than mere novelty is necessary to support a valid patent. Congress, after 100 years of experience with a concept which came to be called "invention," attempted to improve the situation by requiring that an invention not be "obvious" if it is to be patented. It seems safe to say that in the intervening time the doctrine of non-obviousness has not developed into a foolproof yardstick for measuring the quality of cerebral or other effort necessary to make an advance over the …

Intellectual And Industrial Property In A Nutshell, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

First, intellectual and industrial property is property--extremely valuable property at that. However, this is not a subject that gets more than passing attention in many curricula, and none in most. Consequently, few lawyers, aside from the specialists, know much about it. Moreover, unlike most areas of legal specialization, such as tax, labor, and anti-trust law, the basic principles of which are known to most general practitioners, if a generalist knows anything about literary or industrial property, it is apt to be wrong. Furthermore, because clients tend to approach generalists first, substantial and incurable injury may result from a generalist's mistaken …

The Fourth Dimension In Labeling: Trademark Consequences Of An Improper Label - Part Ii, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

Where does the trademark user stand today? What should he do? Perhaps he should review all his labeling in the very near future to try to catch any heretofore missed improprieties therein. If he should miss one or two, however, will his valuable trademarks be regarded as ab initio invalid? Will they be cancelled, pirated away, refused enforcement or what?

in an attempt to answer those questions, it seems worthwhile to synthesize the law that has been heretofore covered, and, perhaps, try to condense it into a few meaningful principles by which the trademark user may be guided.

The Fourth Dimension In Labeling: Trademark Consequences Of An Improper Label - Part I, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

As indicated by the title, this is an inquiry into the trademark ramifications of labeling. Certain kinds of conduct may well result in cancellation of federal rights in trademark registration. This is equally true with respect to trademark application for registration. It is therefore useful to consider at the outset the impact that improper labeling may have on a party's right to register. Most unfortunately, if [a] label defect is not detected in the registration process, or if there is substantial delay between commencement of use of the mark and attempted registration, a party may find his rights seriously compromised. …