Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Infringement (3)
- Patent (3)
- Copyright (2)
- Federal (2)
- Remedies (2)
-
- Supreme Court (2)
- Acquisitions (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Appeals (1)
- Asian (1)
- Assigning infringement claims (1)
- Band (1)
- Benefits (1)
- Bibliometrics (1)
- Challenges (1)
- Circuit (1)
- Citation networks (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Constitutional (1)
- Copyright act (1)
- Copyright holders (1)
- Copyright infringement (1)
- Copyright protection (1)
- Damages (1)
- Enforcement (1)
- Ethnic (1)
- Ex ante incentives (1)
- Exclusive (1)
- Federal Circuit (1)
- Football (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law
Assigning Infringement Claims: Silvers V. Sony Pictures, Heather B. Sanborn
Assigning Infringement Claims: Silvers V. Sony Pictures, Heather B. Sanborn
Maine Law Review
The Copyright Act establishes protection for original, creative works of authorship as a means of providing ex ante incentives for creativity. But how real is that protection? Imagine that you have written a script and managed to have your play produced in a local community theater. A few years later, you find that a major Hollywood studio has taken your script, adapted it slightly, and made it into the next summer blockbuster, raking in millions without ever obtaining a license from you. Of course, you can sue them for infringement. But how much will that litigation cost and what are …
Three Hundred Nos: An Empirical Analysis Of The First 300+ Denials Of Institution For Inter Partes And Covered Business Method Patent Reviews Prior To In Re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, Llc, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 112 (2015), Jarrad Wood, Jonathan Stroud
Three Hundred Nos: An Empirical Analysis Of The First 300+ Denials Of Institution For Inter Partes And Covered Business Method Patent Reviews Prior To In Re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, Llc, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 112 (2015), Jarrad Wood, Jonathan Stroud
Jonathan R. K. Stroud
Tasked in 2011 with creating powerful new patent review trial regimes, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office—through the efforts of their freshly empowered quasi-judicial body, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board—set to creating a fast-paced trial with limited discovery and concentrated efficiency. For two years, the proceedings have proved potent, holding unpatentable many of the claims that reached decisions on the merits. Yet a small subsection of petitions never make it past the starting gate, resulting in wasted time and effort on the parts of petitioners—and likely sighs of relief from the rights-holders. The AIA exempted institution decisions from appellate …
Substantial Similarity: Kohus Got It Right, Gabriel Godoy-Dalmau
Substantial Similarity: Kohus Got It Right, Gabriel Godoy-Dalmau
Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review
This Note is organized as follows. Part I discusses the historical development of the substantial similarity inquiry and its role in a Plaintiff’s prima facie case of copyright infringement. Part II evaluates more recent developments in the substantial similarity inquiry. Part III argues that the various standards that lower courts have developed are themselves substantially similar to each other. This analysis is in line with the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus. Although largely ignored by the scholarly community, the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus got it right.
The Patently Unexceptional Venue Statute, Paul Gugliuzza, Megan M. La Belle
The Patently Unexceptional Venue Statute, Paul Gugliuzza, Megan M. La Belle
Faculty Scholarship
Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as “exceptionalist,” particularly on issues of procedure. The court’s interpretation of the venue statute for patent infringement suits seems, at first glance, to fit that mold. According to the Federal Circuit, the statute places few constraints on the plaintiff’s choice of forum when suing corporate defendants. This permissive venue rule has lead critics to suggest that the court is, once again, outside the mainstream. The Supreme Court’s recent grant of certiorari in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods would seem to indicate that those critics …
Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: 'Disparaging' Trademarks Meet The First Amendment 02-07-2017, Niki Kuckes
Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: 'Disparaging' Trademarks Meet The First Amendment 02-07-2017, Niki Kuckes
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Private Or Public Right? Who Should Adjudicate Patentability Disputes And Is The Current Scheme Really Constitutional?, Jasmyne M. Baynard
Private Or Public Right? Who Should Adjudicate Patentability Disputes And Is The Current Scheme Really Constitutional?, Jasmyne M. Baynard
Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review
“The patent bargain is the foundation upon which the patent system is built: in exchange for protections for an invention, the inventor agrees to make public their inventions so that others may build upon it.” The patent bargain creates a presumption of protection for the inventors, yet categorizing the patent a public right or a private right has diminished expectations for inventors and confusion for the masses. On October 11, 2016, the Supreme Court denied two petitions for writ of certiorari that challenged the constitutionality of Patent Trial and Review Board proceedings on the basis of the patent owner’s Seventh …
Which Supreme Court Cases Influenced Recent Supreme Court Ip Decisions? A Citation Study, Joseph S. Miller
Which Supreme Court Cases Influenced Recent Supreme Court Ip Decisions? A Citation Study, Joseph S. Miller
Scholarly Works
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided an increasing number of intellectual property cases — especially patent cases — over the last several terms. Which prior cases influence the stated reasoning in these recent Supreme Court IP cases? A handful of citation studies of supreme courts in the U.S., both state and federal, conducted over the last 40 years suggest that the Court would most often cite its own prior cases; that it would cite its more recent cases more often than its older cases; and that a small number of its prior cases would receive a large share of the …
How Much Has The Supreme Court Changed Patent Law?, Paul Gugliuzza
How Much Has The Supreme Court Changed Patent Law?, Paul Gugliuzza
Faculty Scholarship
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided a remarkable number of patent cases in the past decade, particularly as compared to the first twenty years of the Federal Circuit’s existence. No longer is the Federal Circuit “the de facto Supreme Court of patents,” as Mark Janis wrote in 2001. Rather, it seems the Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of patents. In the article at the center of this symposium, Judge Timothy Dyk of the Federal Circuit writes that the Supreme Court’s decisions “have had a major impact on patent law,” citing, among other evidence, the Court’s seventy percent reversal rate …
Buying Monopoly: Antitrust Limits On Damages For Externally Acquired Patents, Erik N. Hovenkamp, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Buying Monopoly: Antitrust Limits On Damages For Externally Acquired Patents, Erik N. Hovenkamp, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
The “monopoly” authorized by the Patent Act refers to the exclusionary power of individual patents. That is not the same thing as the acquisition of individual patent rights into portfolios that dominate a market, something that the Patent Act never justifies and that the antitrust laws rightfully prohibit.
Most patent assignments are procompetitive and serve to promote the efficient commercialization of patented inventions. However, patent acquisitions may also be used to combine substitute patents from external patentees, giving the acquirer an unearned monopoly position in the relevant technology market. A producer requires only one of the substitutes, but by acquiring …