Law Commons^™

“Sacrifice And Recoupment” In The Antitrust Analysis Of Patent Settlements: Actavis Through The Lens Of Brooke Group, Aspen Skiing, And Trinko, Bryan Gant

American University Business Law Review

Patent settlements are typically procompetitive, benefiting not only the settling parties but also the courts and the general public. But in rare cases patent settlements might instead harm competition, and thus raise antitrust concerns. How are courts to determine when antitrust scrutiny should — and, more importantly, should not — be applied to patent settlements? The answer ostensibly came in the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. Under Actavis, antitrust scrutiny of patent settlements may “sometimes” be appropriate where there is a “large,” “unexplained” “reverse payment” from the patentee to the patent challenger. Unless, that is, the …

Hacking Antitrust: Competition Policy And The Computer Fraud And Abuse Act, Charles Duan

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, a federal computer trespass statute that prohibits accessing a computer "without authorization or exceeding authorized access," has often been criticized for clashing with online norms, over-criminalizing common behavior, and infringing freedom-of-expression interests. These controversies over the CFAA have raised difficult questions about how the statute is to be interpreted, with courts of appeals split on the proper construction and the Supreme Courtset to consider the law in its current October Term 2020.

This article considers the CFAA in a new light, namely its effects on competition. Rather than merely preventing injurious trespass upon computers, …

Big Pharma Monopoly: Why Consumers Keep Landing On "Park Place" And How The Game Is Rigged, Mark S. Levy

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Circular Logic Of Actavis, Joshua B. Fischman

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Citizen Petitions: Long, Late-Filed, And At-Last Denied, Michael A. Carrier, Carl Minniti

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Dialogue, Jonas Anderson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

This Article examines the unique dialogic relationship that exists between the Supreme Court and Congress concerning patent law. In most areas of the law, Congress and the Supreme Court engage directly with each other to craft legal rules. When it comes to patent law, however, Congress and the Court often interact via an intermediary institution: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In patent law, dialogue often begins when Congress or the Supreme Court acts as a dialogic catalyst, signaling reform priorities to which the Federal Circuit often responds.

Appreciating the unique nature of patent dialogue has important …

Using Competition Law To Promote Access To Knowledge, Sean Flynn

Contributions to Books

One of the points of convergence among the many strands of the A2K movement is resistance to the one-size-fits-all ratcheting up of intellectual property provisions around the world. The resistance is grounded in analysis showing that intellectual property rules often create social costs that far outweigh their intended benefits. Much of the A2K movement’s advocacy for limitations of intellectual property rights is located within the field of intellectual property law – promoting the inclusion and use of balancing mechanisms within the laws granting intellectual property rights. But intellectual property rights are also shaped and limited by their interaction with other …

Increased Market Power As A New Secondary Consideration In Patent Law A Review Of Recent Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Andrew Blair-Stanek

American University Law Review

Courts have developed several non-technical “secondary considerations” to help judges and juries in patent litigation decide whether a patent meets the crucial statutory requirement that a patent be non-obvious. This Article proposes a tenth secondary consideration to help judges and juries: increased market power. If a patent measurably increases its holders’ market power in the market into which it sells products or services, then that increase should weigh in favor of finding the patent non-obvious. Using increased market power incorporates the predictive benefits of several other secondary considerations, while often increasing the accuracy and availability of evidence. It would provide …

Promoting Innovation Competition Through The Aspen/Kodak Rule, Jonathan Baker

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

Product Differentiation Through Space And Time: Some Antitrust Policy Issues, Jonathan Baker

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.