Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Antitrust (2)
- FRAND (2)
- Patents (2)
- Antitrust regulation & policy (1)
- Aspen (1)
-
- Chicago & Harvard Schools (1)
- Comparative law (1)
- Competition law (1)
- Diluton (1)
- Economics (1)
- Equity (1)
- Exclusive Dealing (1)
- Fair use (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Functionality (1)
- Genericism (1)
- Injunctions (1)
- Legal theory (1)
- Qualcomm (1)
- Rambus (1)
- Refusal to Deal (1)
- Rogers test (1)
- Standard Setting (1)
- Standard essential patents (1)
- Standards (1)
- Trademark (1)
- Tying (1)
- Unclean hands (1)
- Unfair competition (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
Justice Department's New Position On Patents, Standard Setting, And Injunctions, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Justice Department's New Position On Patents, Standard Setting, And Injunctions, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
A deep split in American innovation policy has arisen between new economy and old economy innovation. In a recent policy statement, the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department takes a position that tilts more toward the old economy. Its December, 2019, policy statement on remedies for Standard Essential Patents issued jointly with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the National Institute of Standards and Technology reflects this movement.
The policy statement as a whole contains two noteworthy problems: one is a glaring omission, and the other is a mischaracterization of the scope of antitrust liability. Both positions are strongly …
Valuing The Freedom Of Speech And The Freedom To Compete In Defenses To Trademark And Related Claims In The United States, Jennifer E. Rothman
Valuing The Freedom Of Speech And The Freedom To Compete In Defenses To Trademark And Related Claims In The United States, Jennifer E. Rothman
All Faculty Scholarship
This book chapter appears in the CAMBRIDGE HANDBOOK ON INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE TRADEMARK LAW, edited by Jane C. Ginsburg & Irene Calboli (Cambridge Univ. Press 2020). The Chapter provides an overview of the defenses to trademark infringement, dilution, and false endorsement claims that serve the goals of free expression and fair competition. In particular, the Chapter covers the defenses of genericism, functionality, descriptive and nominative fair use, the Rogers test, statutory exemptions to dilution claims, and the questions of whether and how an independent First Amendment defense applies in light of recent Supreme Court decisions.
In addition to providing a …
Frand And Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Frand And Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
This paper considers when a patentee’s violation of a FRAND commitment also violates the antitrust laws. It warns against two extremes. First, is thinking that any violation of a FRAND obligation is an antitrust violation as well. FRAND obligations are contractual, and most breaches of contract do not violate antitrust law. The other extreme is thinking that, because a FRAND violation is a breach of contract, it cannot also be an antitrust violation.
Every antitrust case must consider the market environment in which conduct is to be evaluated. SSOs operated by multiple firms are joint ventures. Antitrust’s role is to …
Framing The Chicago School Of Antitrust Analysis, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Fiona Scott Morton
Framing The Chicago School Of Antitrust Analysis, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Fiona Scott Morton
All Faculty Scholarship
The Chicago School of antitrust has benefited from a great deal of law office history, written by admiring advocates rather than more dispassionate observers. This essay attempts a more neutral stance, looking at the ideology, political impulses, and economics that produced the Chicago School of antitrust policy and that account for its durability.
The origins of the Chicago School lie in a strong commitment to libertarianism and nonintervention. Economic models of perfect competition best suited these goals. The early strength of the Chicago School of antitrust was that it provided simple, convincing answers to everything that was wrong with antitrust …