Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 30 of 33

Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law

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 Jan 2015

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

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

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 …


Music As Cultural Heritage: Analysis Of The Means Of Preventing The Exploitation Of Intangible Cultural Heritage, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 228 (2015), Ronald Inawat Jan 2015

Music As Cultural Heritage: Analysis Of The Means Of Preventing The Exploitation Of Intangible Cultural Heritage, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 228 (2015), Ronald Inawat

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

What started out as a law school requirement quickly snowballed into an analysis of the relationship between intellectual property and cultural heritage. I am a music guy at heart, having played piano since I was five years old, having composed one song (after multiple tries), and now working directly with musicians and artists. So when I began researching a topic for an article that would connect the dots between the cultural heritage and its respective music, I could only come across legal doctrine and articles that focused heavily on tangible art and artifacts. So what happened to the music? After …


Public Standards And Patent Damages, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 199 (2015), Ben Johnson Jan 2015

Public Standards And Patent Damages, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 199 (2015), Ben Johnson

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Some markets require legislation in order to exist. The products and/or services offered by those markets may be covered by one or more letters patent. In certain of those markets, a situation arises in which a private party owns a right to exclude others from participating in that publicly-enabled market. These situations may be referred to “public standards.” Like their cousins in the private sector, public standards require special consideration when it comes to determining potential compensation to the patentee from its competitors. Following the lead of the Western District of Washington, this paper recommends a modification of the traditional …


Parody In Trademark Law: Dumb Starbucks Makes Trademark Law Look Dumb, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 143 (2015), Deborah Kemp, Lynn Forsythe, Ida Jones Jan 2015

Parody In Trademark Law: Dumb Starbucks Makes Trademark Law Look Dumb, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 143 (2015), Deborah Kemp, Lynn Forsythe, Ida Jones

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Comedian Nathan Fielder opened a coffee shop which looked like a Starbucks, but he put the word “dumb” in front of the Starbucks name. Fielder justified his behavior based on the argument that he had created a parody of Starbucks. This article explores when a parody of a trademark may be entitled to protection under the First Amendment. If so, what are the limits of this protection, especially when a trademark holder argues that the parody is diluting his or her trademark by either blurring or tarnishment? The article analyzes federal statutes and judicial decisions. It concludes with recommendations to …


Bad News Birkins: Counterfeit In Luxury Brands, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 249 (2015), Colleen Jordan Orscheln Jan 2015

Bad News Birkins: Counterfeit In Luxury Brands, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 249 (2015), Colleen Jordan Orscheln

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The luxury fashion industry spends millions of dollars each year fighting counterfeits, yet a fake Louis Vuitton bag is easily purchased on street corners around the world. Proponents of the counterfeits argue that the fakes translate to advertising for the brands, while the luxury brands argue that it damages the future of their brand. The counterfeit market has been linked to child labor, human trafficking, organized crime, and some terrorist groups. The current federal civil and criminal statutes exclude purchasers from prosecution and instead focus on the distributors of the goods. This comment proposes the strengthening of these laws by …


Patently Preempted, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 268 (2015), Nick Vogel Jan 2015

Patently Preempted, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 268 (2015), Nick Vogel

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Small and medium size businesses often take advantage of the latest advancements in technology. Doing so, however, now seems to carry the risk of patent infringement. In 2012, so called patent trolls, also known as Non Practicing Entities, began sending letters to small and medium sized businesses demanding money in exchange for a license to use allegedly patented technology. Many saw the demands as an abuse of the patent system. In response, states have passed or are considering statutes that outlaw patent holders from delivering a bad faith notice of infringement. The State of Vermont was the first to address …


Who's The Vandal? The Recent Controversy Over The Destruction Of 5pointz And How Much Protection Does Moral Rights Law Give To Authorized Aerosol Art?, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 326 (2015), Susanna Frederick Fischer Jan 2015

Who's The Vandal? The Recent Controversy Over The Destruction Of 5pointz And How Much Protection Does Moral Rights Law Give To Authorized Aerosol Art?, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 326 (2015), Susanna Frederick Fischer

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

This paper considers the extent to which federal moral rights law protects authorized graffiti and aerosol art against destruction, in the context of the controversy over the destruction of 5Pointz. 5Pointz, a sprawling complex of warehouse buildings in Queens, was a Mecca for aerosol art. The buildings’ owners ordered the demolition of 5Pointz after the November 2013 order by New York federal district judge Frederic Block denying the artists a preliminary injunction to stop destruction under the federal moral rights statute, the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA). This paper argues that Judge Block erred in finding that the transient nature …


How Law Defines Art, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 314 (2015), Derek Fincham Jan 2015

How Law Defines Art, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 314 (2015), Derek Fincham

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Defining art is both hard and subjective. But in lots of contexts the law must arrive at a just solution to hard and subjective questions. The art community has largely neglected the task of defining artworks. This neglect has crept into legal disputes, particularly those involving conceptual art which has loosened the limits of aesthetics, form, function, and composition. This makes crafting a definition of art even more challenging. Yet the Law has an important part to play in resolving art disputes—courts end up defining art no matter how cautiously they approach the question. They do not set out to …


Some Speculation About Mirror Neurons And Copyright, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 410 (2015), Stephen Mcjohn Jan 2015

Some Speculation About Mirror Neurons And Copyright, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 410 (2015), Stephen Mcjohn

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Copyright plays a central role in regulating cultural transmission. Authors are given exclusive rights to copy, adapt, distribute, perform and display their works. These rights have limits, most notable fair use and the non-protection of ideas. In setting the bounds of those limits, courts implicitly follow some basic folk psychology. This paper would explore how neuroscience can be used to illuminate and challenge those background assumptions. Copyright law implicitly assumes that literal copying is not necessary for cultural transmission. If there are many ways to express the same idea, then transmission of an idea will not be restricted by prohibiting …


The Next Great Copyright Act And The Future Of Radio, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 378 (2015), Christopher Doval, Don Anque, Maesea Mccalpin Jan 2015

The Next Great Copyright Act And The Future Of Radio, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 378 (2015), Christopher Doval, Don Anque, Maesea Mccalpin

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

With the advancement of digital broadcasting technologies, the lack of a revision to copyright law has created a creative and distribution bottleneck for artists by companies. The current range for compulsory licensing agreements does not protect the interests of artists through modern digital transmission tools, and leaves them fending for themselves if they wish to have access to new digital platforms. Moreover organizations, such as the Recording Industry Association of America, are in greater positions of power when applying existing copyright laws and definitions to new technologies that innovators never intended to be analogous to pre-existing technologies to begin with. …


A Rose By Any Other Name: How An Illusionist Used Copyright Law As A Patent, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 357 (2015), Sydney Beckman Jan 2015

A Rose By Any Other Name: How An Illusionist Used Copyright Law As A Patent, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 357 (2015), Sydney Beckman

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Teller is a famous illusionist who, in recent years, has been performing a stage act with Penn Jillete in Las Vegas, Nevada. Teller’s signature trick, known as “Shadows,” was copied by a magician in Belgium who offered to sell the method. The Belgian’s trick, titled “The Rose and Her Shadow,” was virtually identical to Teller’s illusion. That which we call a rose by any other name . . . Teller wanted the Belgian magician to stop offering the trick for sale. After an unsuccessful attempt to negotiate, Teller took his dispute to federal court. His goal? To protect that which …


Did Copyright Kill The Radio Star? Why The Recorded Music Industry And Copyright Act Should Welcome Webcasters Into The Fold, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 292 (2015), Patrick Koncel Jan 2015

Did Copyright Kill The Radio Star? Why The Recorded Music Industry And Copyright Act Should Welcome Webcasters Into The Fold, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 292 (2015), Patrick Koncel

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The Copyright Act has not kept pace with the times, and the next revolution is going full stream ahead. Rather than adapt, entrenched interests at the Copyright table push for more protection, while new technologies are demonized and underrepresented. The resulting Copyright Act’s provisions relating to internet-based radio, ranging from passive over-the-air broadcasts to fully interactive music hosting sites, are a patchwork of accommodations and concessions to these interests. For all non-interactive services, licensing music typically occurs within the Copyright Act’s compulsory licensing system. For interactive webcasters, licensing negotiations take place with the copyright holders directly. These negotiations have proven …


The Law As Art Material, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 418 (2015), Daniel Mellis Jan 2015

The Law As Art Material, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 418 (2015), Daniel Mellis

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Daniel Mellis is an artist who incorporates the law and legal language into his work. This article discusses four such works: I. A postcard that predicts when its copyright will expire. II. A performance piece that uses the Visual Artists Rights Act to turn money into Art. III. An installation about the fourth amendment on the paper bags at a liquor store. IV. A bureaucratic entity that allows people to renounce, not their citizenship, but rather their symbolic attachment in a nation state or empire.


On Art Attacks: At The Confluence Of Shock, Appropriation, And The Law, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 392 (2015), Rachel Buker Jan 2015

On Art Attacks: At The Confluence Of Shock, Appropriation, And The Law, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 392 (2015), Rachel Buker

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Does the law adequately recognize the expansive nature of art, especially in scenarios involving controversial acts of appropriation art? Of particular curiosity is just how the law should treat acts of artistic appropriation involving the creation of artwork on top of other original works of art, or art attacks. This is an issue that has been largely unaddressed by the courts outside the realm of criminal proceedings. However, the legal implications of such acts reach far beyond crimes and property torts, involving copyright, moral rights, freedom of expression, and the preservation of cultural heritage. Indeed, the issues are not just …


The Remains Of Laches In Copyright Infringement Cases: Implications Of Petrella V. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 432 (2015), Daniel Brainard Jan 2015

The Remains Of Laches In Copyright Infringement Cases: Implications Of Petrella V. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 432 (2015), Daniel Brainard

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Common law equitable doctrines are fundamentally at odds with modern statutes of limitations. While modern copyright courts found new ways to allow laches and the Copyright Act’s three year statute of limitations to coexist, the foundation for doing so was significantly weakened. The Supreme Court in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer restricted the use of laches as a defense to copyright infringement to only extraordinary circumstances and provided two Circuit Court cases as demonstrating examples of laches for future use. In actuality, however, it appears the Supreme Court and Circuit Courts failed to analyze the facts in depth and ended up rendering …


The U.S. And Russian Patent Systems: Recent Amendments And Global Implications For The Protection Of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 504 (2015), Elena Beier, Anne Wright Fiero Jan 2015

The U.S. And Russian Patent Systems: Recent Amendments And Global Implications For The Protection Of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 504 (2015), Elena Beier, Anne Wright Fiero

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Recent legislative and geo-political activity might suggest little common ground between the United States and Russia. The respective intellectual property laws of these two countries, however, share many common goals. In fact, as reflected in the Report of the Innovation Working Group of the Russia-US Bilateral Presidential Commission (initiated by the Ministry of Economic development of the Russian Federation and U.S. Department of State), the two countries are trending towards cooperative intellectual property legislation. This article compares U.S. and Russian patent laws, with a particular emphasis on recent amendments in the areas of inventorship, prior art, and technology transfers. It …


Revisited 2015: Protection Of U.S. Trade Secret Assets: Critical Amendments To The Economic Espionage Act Of 1996, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 476 (2015), R. Mark Halligan Jan 2015

Revisited 2015: Protection Of U.S. Trade Secret Assets: Critical Amendments To The Economic Espionage Act Of 1996, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 476 (2015), R. Mark Halligan

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

In order to protect the national and economic interests of the United States, the Economic Espionage Act was enacted in 1996. Although intended to prevent and deter trade secret theft, the EEA is limited to criminal prosecutions. Critical amendments to the EEA are required to create a civil cause of action in the new information-based economy and the international marketplace. In 2008, the author recommended two critical amendments to the Economic Espionage Act that have been vetted and have been the subject of legislative proposals for the past 7 years. The author now revisits developments since 2008 and underscores the …


Can I Show You Something? The Public Use Bar And Overemphasis On Public Access, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 590 (2015), Benjamin Lee Jan 2015

Can I Show You Something? The Public Use Bar And Overemphasis On Public Access, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 590 (2015), Benjamin Lee

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The public use bar has long been a shield protecting the public against unscrupulous inventors hoping to create public dependency before seeking patent monopolization. Courts have repeatedly sided in favor of protecting the public interest. But how much protection do inventors themselves deserve in this battle of interests? This comment examines the history and application of the tests for public use utilized by the courts. Going further, the comment highlights the Federal Circuit’s low corroborating evidence requirement in Pronova Biopharma Norge AS v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA and questions whether this comports with the policies underlying patent law or too readily …


Who Owns Ellen's Oscar Selfie? Deciphering Rights Of Attribution Concerning User Generated Content On Social Media, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 564 (2015), Michael Reed Jan 2015

Who Owns Ellen's Oscar Selfie? Deciphering Rights Of Attribution Concerning User Generated Content On Social Media, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 564 (2015), Michael Reed

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

One of the most memorable moments of the 2014 Academy Awards was Ellen DeGeneres’s famous selfie taken with Bradley Cooper, Meryl Streep, and other famous friends. This so-called “Oscar Selfie” has been estimated to be worth millions of advertising dollars for the event’s sponsor, Samsung. DeGeneres’ use of selfies as a promotional tool was novel method of documenting Hollywood’s greatest night which proved an undeniable successful. However, the fact that Bradley Cooper actually captured the Oscar Selfie raises a number of important questions about how user-generated content distributed through social media fits into existing intellectual property law. At the heart …


The Economics Of Memory: How Copyright Decides Which Books Do (And Don’T) Become Classics, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 521 (2015), Stephen Maurer Jan 2015

The Economics Of Memory: How Copyright Decides Which Books Do (And Don’T) Become Classics, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 521 (2015), Stephen Maurer

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Legal scholars usually analyze copyright as an incentive and sometime obstacle to creation. This encourages us to see publishers as middlemen who siphon off rents that would be better spent on authors. By comparison, recent social science research emphasizes that word-of-mouth markets are highly imperfect. This means that many deserving titles will never find readers unless some publisher takes the trouble to market them. But this second view is deeply subversive. After all, the need for publishers – and reward – does not end when a book is published. At least in principle, copyright should last forever. The trouble with …


Pulling The 'Trigger' On The Hatch-Waxman Act's 180-Day Exclusivity Using Inter Partes Review, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 453 (2015), Jaimin Shah Jan 2015

Pulling The 'Trigger' On The Hatch-Waxman Act's 180-Day Exclusivity Using Inter Partes Review, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 453 (2015), Jaimin Shah

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The America Invents Act has put in place quick and efficient mechanisms for challenging granted patents in an Article I adversarial setting. And the Hatch-Waxman Act has been the roadmap for generic drug approval-related patent infringement action in Article III courts. An interesting, heretofore unaddressed question lurks at an intersection of the two pieces of enterprising legislation: What impact should a final decision canceling patent claims under the AIA setting have on the forfeiture of 180-day exclusivity under the Hatch-Waxman Act? The 180-day exclusivity is an important piece in the Hatch-Waxman game of chess. This comment presents both the case …


The Building Blocks Of Copyright Protection For Architectural Works: Roadblock Or Masterpiece?, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 607 (2015), Vaughn Drozd Jan 2015

The Building Blocks Of Copyright Protection For Architectural Works: Roadblock Or Masterpiece?, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 607 (2015), Vaughn Drozd

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The current test for determining substantial similarity for architectural works is detrimental to the utility of the United States as well as architects’ creativity. The “total concept and feel” test is ill-equipped to determine whether architectural copyright infringement has occurred, as it does take into account the value that many architectural works provide to society. Further, the “ordinary observer” is an artificial concept that cannot be used to determine whether copyright infringement has occurred with such a highly technical field as architecture. This comment breaks down the current system used to analyze copyright infringement for architectural works. Then, this comment …


Patent Troll: The Brewing Storm Of Patent Reform In The United States Of America, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 63 (2015), Prachi Agarwal Jan 2015

Patent Troll: The Brewing Storm Of Patent Reform In The United States Of America, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 63 (2015), Prachi Agarwal

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

“Patent trolls” have been a problem in the U.S. for many years, creating a storm of patent reform in all three branches of the U.S. government. The modus operandi of these companies (known as non-practicing entities “NPEs” or Patent Assertion Entities “PAEs”) is to acquire patents with no intention of practicing the invention or developing their products and with the sole purpose of licensing them aggressively or instituting lawsuits against infringers. This practice has been criticized as being anti-competitive as it curbs economic growth and technological development and stifles competition. The U.S. Congress’ first attempt to control the patent troll …


The Intersection Between Ucc Article 9 And Intellectual Property: The Need For A National, Centralized Filing System For Ip, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 83 (2015), Willa Gibson Jan 2015

The Intersection Between Ucc Article 9 And Intellectual Property: The Need For A National, Centralized Filing System For Ip, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 83 (2015), Willa Gibson

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Intellectual property has emerged as a commercially valuable and dominant asset to our economy promoting innovative technological developments that have and continue to stimulate economic growth promoting our free-enterprise, market-based system. Secured transactions involving intellectual property also promotes and stimulates our economic growth. Such transactions provide innovators with much needed capital to design, develop, and market their intellectual property. Despite the economic benefits derived from secured financing involving such property, legal uncertainty exists whether federal or state law governs how to perfect best security interests in intellectual property. Having a perfected security interest in collateral puts a lender in its …


The Great Decentralization: How Web 3.0 Will Weaken Copyrights, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 136 (2015), Nick Vogel Jan 2015

The Great Decentralization: How Web 3.0 Will Weaken Copyrights, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 136 (2015), Nick Vogel

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Bitcoin’s popularity increased as its value increased and people became excited about the prospect of a trustless, decentralized currency that could be used on the Internet. Within the last two years, however, people and organizations began exploiting the potential of the block chain that powers the bitcoin network. These people realized that the block chain—a transparent public ledger that cannot be altered—can be used for more than digital currency. One such organization calls itself Ethereum and its developers plan to use block chains to allow decentralized autonomous applications to operate free of government censorship or corruption. While such a network …


Inventing A New Way Of Dealing With Circumvention: A Patent-Based Alternative To The Dmca, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 91 (2015), Priya Desai Jan 2015

Inventing A New Way Of Dealing With Circumvention: A Patent-Based Alternative To The Dmca, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 91 (2015), Priya Desai

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Over time, it has become easier for consumers to steal music. Some technologies, like ReDigi, have been specifically designed to allow copyright infringement by giving consumers the ability to sell digitally purchased music files. While copyright laws have been updated to deal with changing technologies, the laws have not been sufficient to keep up. This comment highlights the failings of modern copyright law and questions whether patent laws are a viable way to ensure that technologies that induce copyright infringement do not find marketplace success.


The Conflict Between An Athlete’S Right Of Publicity And The First Amendment, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 117 (2015), Edward Kuester Jan 2015

The Conflict Between An Athlete’S Right Of Publicity And The First Amendment, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 117 (2015), Edward Kuester

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The recent rise of fantasy sports has created a conflict between an athlete’s right of publicity and the First Amendment of the Constitution. The legal question being discussed is whether athletes have a right of publicity in their identity, specifically their performance statistics and biographical information. If a right of publicity violation does exist, courts will have to determine whether a fantasy provider’s First Amendment privilege can prevail against an athlete’s publicity rights. This comment examines recent litigation surrounding athletes’ identities and the problems courts have in balancing the conflict between an athlete’s right of publicity and the First Amendment. …


From The Statute Of Anne To Z.Z. Top: The Strange World Of American Sound Recordings, How It Came About, And Why It Will Never Go Away, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 1 (2015), Bruce Epperson Jan 2015

From The Statute Of Anne To Z.Z. Top: The Strange World Of American Sound Recordings, How It Came About, And Why It Will Never Go Away, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 1 (2015), Bruce Epperson

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Uniquely among all industrialized nations, the United States extended no copyright protection to sound recordings until 1972. The individual aural representation captured for playback could only be protected by the common or statutory laws of individual states. This feature was carried forward into the comprehensive revision of the Copyright Act implemented on January 1, 1978. Although the Copyright Act contained a sweeping provision that brought works created prior to the legislation under federal protection, pre-1972 sound recordings were specifically exempted. The extent to which this lack of status has created a legal and environmental void is best demonstrated by a …


Living With Monsanto, 2015 Mich. St. L. Rev. 559 (2015), Daryl Lim Jan 2015

Living With Monsanto, 2015 Mich. St. L. Rev. 559 (2015), Daryl Lim

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

Bowman v. Monsanto Co. signaled the end of an era of seed saving. Farmers must buy new seed for replanting or risk patent infringement. The familiar rhetoric of oppressed farmers belies the fact that Monsanto’s success rests in part on farmers prizing its innovations. Current trends indicate that this reliance on Monsanto will continue. The Supreme Court correctly found for Monsanto. However, future cases must iron out the kinks in the Bowman decision. Despite the Court’s best intentions, inadvertence cannot shield farmers from patent infringement. The Court must also make it clear that patentees cannot use licensing restrictions to claw …


Troubleshooting Legal Malfunction: Lexmark And Consumer Standing Under The Lanham Act, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 453 (2015), Jeremy Rovinsky Jan 2015

Troubleshooting Legal Malfunction: Lexmark And Consumer Standing Under The Lanham Act, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 453 (2015), Jeremy Rovinsky

UIC Law Review

This article suggests that the recent Lexmark decision, while resolving the confusion relating to Lanham Act standing requirements, does nothing to protect those most vulnerable—the consumers. Congress must explicitly declare that consumers have standing under the Lanham Act when they have been damaged by purchasing falsely represented goods or services. Section I provides a history of the Lanham Act and illustrates how different courts initially allowed and then precluded consumers from bringing claims under Section 43(a)’s “any person” language. Section II critiques the opinions that have found no consumer standing, including the Supreme Court’s recent Lexmark decision. Section III highlights …