Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

The Right Not To Use In Property And Patent Law, Oskar Liivak, Eduardo M. Peñalver

Oskar Liivak

In Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co., the Supreme Court held (1) that patent owners have an absolute right not to practice their patent and (2) that even these nonpracticing patent owners are entitled to the liberal use of injunctive relief against infringers. Both of these holdings have been very important to the viability of patent assertion entities, the so-called patent trolls. In eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., the Supreme Court softened the injunction rule. In this Article, we argue that Congress or the Court should reconsider Continental Paper Bag’s embrace of an absolute right not to …

Rethinking The Concept Of Exclusion In Patent Law, Oskar Liivak

Oskar Liivak

Patent law’s broad exclusionary rule is one of its defining features. It is unique within intellectual property as it prohibits acts of independent creation. Even if a second inventor had no connection or aid from an initial inventor, patent law allows the first inventor to stop the second. Even though a number of pressing problems can be traced to this rule, it remains untouchable; it is thought to be essential for incentivizing invention. But is it really our only choice? And why is it so different from our otherwise widespread reliance on free entry and competition in markets? The current …

Finding Invention, Oskar Liivak

Oskar Liivak

One of the biggest problems plaguing modern patent law is its inability to provide predictable and clear exclusive rights. We would improve clarity by simply following the patent statute and extending exclusion only to "the patented invention." That suggestion, as reasonable as it may sound, is actually quite radical to the dominant patent law orthodoxy. It is not even clear under the dominant patent law orthodoxy what it would mean to limit patent scope to the invention, but it is generally presumed that it must lead to unacceptably narrow patents. Thus, even if it provides clarity, the invention is thought …

Maintaining Competition In Copying: Narrowing The Scope Of Gene Patents, Oskar Liivak

Oskar Liivak

In supporting gene patents, the patent office, the courts and other supporters have assumed that gene discoveries are identical to traditional inventions and therefore the patent system should treat them as identical. In other words, they have assumed that the relatively broad claims that are used for traditional inventions are also appropriate for encouraging gene discovery. This article examines this assumption and finds that gene discoveries are critically different from traditional inventions and concludes that the patent system cannot treat them as identical.

As a doctrinal matter, this article applies the generally overlooked constitutional requirements of inventorship and originality and …

The Forgotten Originality Requirement: A Constitutional Hurdle For Gene Patents, Oskar Liivak

Oskar Liivak

Originality has always been a part of patent law. It bars patents that are obtained by copying from someone or from somewhere. Modern judicial interpretations of the patent act have ignored this second element of originality. But as originality is, at least arguably, a constitutional limit of the Patent and Copyright clause, the courts must interpret the patent act consistently to include originality. As a specific example, the paper focuses on patents claiming isolated and purified naturally-occurring gene sequences. The paper concludes that such patents are not original – they are instead just the result of copying – and thus …

The Experimental Use Exception To Patent Infringement: Do Universities Deserve Special Treatment?, Elizabeth A. Rowe

Elizabeth A Rowe

The experimental use exception is a common law exception to the patent-holder's exclusive right of use. It permits the use of another's patented device when such use is for philosophical inquiry, curiosity, or amusement. It has recently come under attack by many who consider it too narrow. They fear that the courts' "narrowing" of the experimental use exception will stifle research and innovation. Much of the discontent with the doctrine has been spurred by a relatively recent Federal Circuit opinion, Madey v. Duke University, which makes clear that a research university does not receive immunity under the experimental use exception …

The Right Not To Use In Property And Patent Law, Oskar Liivak, Eduardo M. Peñalver

Eduardo M. Peñalver

In Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co., the Supreme Court held (1) that patent owners have an absolute right not to practice their patent and (2) that even these nonpracticing patent owners are entitled to the liberal use of injunctive relief against infringers. Both of these holdings have been very important to the viability of patent assertion entities, the so-called patent trolls. In eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., the Supreme Court softened the injunction rule. In this Article, we argue that Congress or the Court should reconsider Continental Paper Bag’s embrace of an absolute right not to …

Reinventing Copyright And Patent, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky

Michigan Law Review

Intellectual property systems all over the world are modeled on a one-size-fitsall principle. However important or unimportant, inventions and original works receive the same scope of protection, for the same period of time, backed by the same variety of legal remedies. Essentially, all intellectual property is equal under the law. This equality comes at a heavy price, however. The equality principle gives all creators access to the same remedies, even when those remedies create perverse litigation incentives. Moreover, society overpays for innovation through more monopoly losses than are strictly necessary to incentivize production. In this Article, we propose a solution …

Patents V. Statutory Exclusivities In Biological Pharmaceuticals - Do We Really Need Both, Yaniv Heled

Yaniv Heled

Over the past decade or so, the United States has been the arena of a boisterous debate regarding the creation of a new regulatory framework for the approval of generic versions of biologics-based pharmaceutical products (also known as "biological products" and "biologics")--an important and increasingly growing class of drugs. The basic purpose of such a framework is to create a fast and less-costly route to FDA approval for biologics that would be similar or identical to already-approved biological products--typically ones that are sold on the market at monopoly rates--thereby allowing cheaper versions of such medicines to enter the market. One …

Coordination-Focused Patent Policy, Stephen Yelderman

Stephen Yelderman

This paper explores the practical consequences of an important shift that has gradually taken place in patent theory. Although it was long agreed that the purpose of granting patents is to reward invention, some scholars now attempt to justify the patent system based on its role in facilitating information exchange and enabling technical coordination among firms. This change in justification is controversial, and its viability remains a fiercely contested question. But despite this intense attention at the level of theory, little has been said about the consequences of this debate for patent policy itself. This Article seeks to fill that …

Saving The Federal Circuit, Paul R. Gugliuzza

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

In a recent, attention-grabbing speech, the Chief Judge of the Seventh Circuit, Diane Wood, argued that Congress should abolish the Federal Circuit’s exclusive jurisdiction over patent cases. Exclusive jurisdiction, she said, provides too much legal uniformity, which harms the patent system. In this response to Judge Wood’s thoughtful speech, I seek to highlight two important premises underlying her argument, neither of which is indisputably true.

The first premise is that the Federal Circuit actually provides legal uniformity. Judge Wood suggests that, due to the Federal Circuit’s exclusive jurisdiction, patent doctrine is insufficiently “percolated,” meaning that it lacks mechanisms through which …

Abolishing Exclusive Jurisdiction In The Federal Circuit: A Response To Judge Wood, Rochelle C. Dreyfus

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

Part of a symposium of responses to Chief Judge Wood’s suggestion for giving regional circuits a share of the Federal Circuit’s authority over patent law, this article argues that now that a degree of nationwide uniformity in patent law has been achieved, it would be a pity to disrupt it. While Chief Judge Wood is right that the law would improve with percolation, a change in the composition of the court, new procedures for challenging patents in the Patent and Trademark Office, a District Court pilot program, and satellite patent offices will bring to the debate new voices, different kinds …

Navigating A Post America Invents Act World: How The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act Supports Small Businesses, Melissa Cerro

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Regulatory Monopoly And Differential Pricing In The Market For Patents , Neel U. Sukhatme

Washington and Lee Law Review

Patents are limited-term monopolies awarded to inventors to incentivize innovation. But there is another monopoly that has been largely overlooked at the heart of patent law: the monopoly of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) over the granting of patents. This Article addresses this topic by developing the notion of a regulatory monopoly, where a single governmental actor has the power to set prices in a regulatory area. The Article explains how regulatory monopolists like the PTO could enhance social welfare via differential pricing—by charging regulated entities differing fees based on their willingness and ability to pay. In particular, …

Facing Down The Trolls: States Stumble On The Bridge To Patent-Assertion Regulation , David Lee Johnson

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Software Patentability After Prometheus, Joseph Holland King

Georgia State University Law Review

This Note examines the history of patentability of abstract ideas and the tests that courts have used to make the determination of whether an invention incorporating an abstract idea is patentable. Part I provides a history of the four seminal cases related to patentable subject matter, as well as some more recent on point decisions. Part II changes focus to the various tests and factors that have been used by the courts, exploring the history of each, discussing the treatment by the Supreme Court, and determining the strengths and weaknesses of each. Based on the discussion in Part II, Part …

Drugged Out: How Cognitive Bias Hurts Drug Innovation, Cynthia M. Ho

San Diego Law Review

This Article hopes to provide a balanced picture of how current patent law and policy promotes mostly modest, yet high priced new drugs, as well as how cognitive biases have perpetuated this situation. This Article highlights the important interplay of cognitive biases not only by the frequently maligned industry but also previously presumed neutral parties, such as academics and policymakers. Most scholars would likely agree that considering how to optimize or at least not distort innovation is an important part of legal scholarship. However, to date, there has been little recognition, let alone robust discussion, of how patent and related …

The Audience In Intellectual Property Infringement, Jeanne C. Fromer, Mark A. Lemley

Michigan Law Review

Every intellectual property (“IP”) right has its own definition of infringement. In this Article, we suggest that this diversity of legal rules is largely traceable to differences in the audience in IP cases. Patent, trademark, copyright, and design patent each focus on a different person as the fulcrum for evaluating IP infringement. That patent law, for example, focuses on an expert audience while trademark looks to a consumer audience explains many of the differences in how patent and trademark cases are decided. Expert audiences are likely to evaluate infringement based on the technical similarity between the plaintiff’s and defendant’s works. …

Judicial Capacities And Patent Claim Construction: An Ordinary Reader Standard, Greg Reilly

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Patent claim construction is a mess. The Federal Circuit’s failure to provide adequate guidance has created significant problems for the patent system. The problems with claim construction result from the Federal Circuit’s inability to resolve whether claim terms should be given (1) the general, acontextual meaning they would have to a skilled person in the field; (2) the specific meaning they have in the context of the patent; or (3) some combination of the two. The claim construction debate largely overlooks the generalist judges who must implement claim construction. This Article fills that gap, concluding that existing approaches are difficult, …

Patent Misuse And Antitrust: Rebirth Or False Dawn?, Daryl Lim

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Article examines how two recent cases, F.T.C. v. Actavis and Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises Inc. could affect both the equitable defense of patent misuse and the patent-antitrust interface more generally. It begins by tracing the history of patent misuse and its reformulation into an “antitrust-lite” doctrine by the Federal Circuit. This Article presents new empirical data confirming this reformulation, and unveils the surprising influence of the Seventh Circuit and the Chicago School on that reformulation. The Article then explores Actavis and Kimble. It explains why Actavis will catalyze more antitrust challenges when patent rights are exercised, and why it …

Pay-For-Delay Settlements In The Wake Of Actavis, Michael L. Fialkoff

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

“Pay-for-delay” settlements, also known as reverse payments, arise when a generic manufacturer pursues FDA approval of a generic version of a brand-name drug. If a patent protects the brand-name drug, the generic manufacturer has the option of contesting the validity of the patent or arguing that its product does not infringe the patent covering the brand-name drug. If the generic manufacturer prevails on either of these claims, the FDA will approve its generic version for sale. Approval of a generic version of a brand-name drug reduces the profitability of the brand-name drug by forcing the brand-name manufacturer to price its …

Aftermarketfailure: Windows Xp's End Of Support, Andrew Tutt

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

After 12 years, support for Windows XP will end on April 8, 2014. So proclaims a Microsoft website with a helpful clock counting down the days. "What does this mean?" the website asks. "It means you should take action." You should "migrate to a current supported operating system - such as Windows 8.1 - so you can receive regular security updates to protect [your] computer from malicious attacks." The costs of mass migration will be immense. About 30% of all desktop PCs are running Windows XP right now. An estimated 10% of the U.S. government's computers run Windows XP, including …

Social Innovation, Peter Lee

Peter Lee

This Article provides the first legal examination of the immensely valuable but underappreciated phenomenon of social innovation. Innovations such as cognitive behavioral therapy, microfinance, and strategies to reduce hospital-based infections greatly enhance social welfare yet operate completely outside of the patent system, the primary legal mechanism for promoting innovation. This Article draws on empirical evidence to elucidate this significant kind of innovation and explore its divergence from the classic model of technological innovation championed by the patent system. In so doing, it illustrates how patent law exhibits a rather crabbed, particularistic conception of innovation. Among other characteristics, innovation in the …

Predictability And Nonobviousness In Patent Law After Ksr, Christopher A. Cotropia

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

In KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., the Supreme Court addressed the doctrine of nonobviousness, the ultimate question of patentability, for the first time in thirty years. In mandating a flexible approach to deciding nonobviousness, the KSR opinion introduced two predictability standards for determining nonobviousness. The Court described predictability of use (hereinafter termed “Type I predictability”)— whether the inventor used the prior art in a predictable manner to create the invention—and predictability of the result (hereinafter termed “Type II predictability”)—whether the invention produced a predictable result—both as a means for proving obviousness. Although Type I predictability is easily explained as …

Markets And Patent Enforcement: A Comparative Investigation Of Non-Practicing Entities In The Unitedstates And Europe, Stefania Fusco

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Is it true that non-practicing entities (NPEs) are primarily a U.S. phenomenon? Over time, several definitions of NPEs have been presented. They range from research institutions that hold patent portfolios for their inventions but do not develop and commercialize any products, to IP asset management firms whose exclusive business is asserting patent claims to collect significant fees from companies operating in certain industries. The latter are also referred to as “patent trolls” and have been the subject of significant debate as to their role in the innovative process in different fields. NPEs are a relatively new phenomenon. Studies have shown …

Structure From Nothing And Claims For Free: Using A Whole-System View Of The Patent System To Improve Notice And Predictability For Software Patents, Holly K. Victorson

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

No uniform or customary method of disclosure for software patents is currently employed by inventors. This Note examines the issues that develop from software patent claims disclosed at various levels of abstraction, and the difficulties encountered by courts and the public when investigating the contours of the software patent space. While the courts have placed some restrictions on the manner in which software inventions are claimed, they are easily bypassed by clever patent applicants who desire to claim the maximum scope of their inventions. In the long run, however, a large “patent thicket” of overlapping and potentially overbroad inventions will …

Holding Up And Holding Out, Colleen V. Chien

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Patent “hold-up” and patent “hold-out” present important, alternative theories for what ails the patent system. Patent “hold-up” occurs when a patent owner sues a company when it is most vulnerable—after it has implemented a technology—and is able wrest a settlement because it is too late for the company to change course. Patent “hold-out” is the practice of companies routinely ignoring patents and resisting patent owner demands because the odds of getting caught are small. Hold-up has arguably predicted the current patent crises, and the ex ante assertion of technology patents whether in the smartphone war, standards, or patent “troll” context. …

After Myriad: Reconsidering The Incentives For Innovation In The Biotech Industry, Daniel K. Yarbrough

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

35 U.S.C. § 101 allows a patent for “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof.” Recently, the Supreme Court issued several key decisions affecting the doctrine of patentable subject matter under § 101. Starting with Bilski v. Kappos (2011), and continuing with Mayo Collaborative Services, Inc. v. Prometheus Laboratories (2012), Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (2013) and, most recently, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International (2014), every year has brought another major change to the way in which the Court assesses patentability. In Myriad, the …

District Courts Versus The Usitc: Considering Exclusionary Relief For F/Rand-Encumbered Standard-Essential Patents, Helen H. Ji

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Technological standards allow manufacturers and consumers to rely upon these agreed-upon basic systems to facilitate sales and further invention. However, where these standards involved patented technology, the process of standard-setting raises many concerns at the intersection of antitrust and patent law. As patent holders advocate for their patents to become part of technological standards, how should courts police this activity to prevent patent holdup and other anti-competitive practices? This Note explores the differing approaches to remedies employed by the United States International Trade Commission and the United States District Courts where standard-essential patents are infringed. This Note further proposes that …

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 …