Law Commons^™

Artificial Stupidity, Clark D. Asay

William & Mary Law Review

Artificial intelligence is everywhere. And yet, the experts tell us, it is not yet actually anywhere. This is because we are yet to achieve artificial general intelligence, or artificially intelligent systems that are capable of thinking for themselves and adapting to their circumstances. Instead, all the AI hype—and it is constant—concerns narrower, weaker forms of artificial intelligence, which are confined to performing specific, narrow tasks. The promise of true artificial general intelligence thus remains elusive. Artificial stupidity reigns supreme.

What is the best set of policies to achieve more general, stronger forms of artificial intelligence? Surprisingly, scholars have paid little …

University Inventions Reconsidered: Debunking The Myth Of University Ownership, Patricia E. Campbell

William & Mary Business Law Review

Most universities today assert ownership rights over all patentable inventions (and many other types of intellectual property) created by members of the university community, including faculty, staff, students, visitors, and others. Universities then attempt to license that intellectual property (IP) to third parties, in order to generate revenue for the university and to give the public the benefit of innovations developed by the institution, often with the use of federal funds. This Article provides an evaluation of the technology transfer policies and practices of U.S. universities. Part I surveys the IP policies of a representative group of universities, showing that …

Nonexcludable Surgical Method Patents, Jonas Anderson

William & Mary Law Review

A patent consists of only one right: the right to exclude others from practicing the patented invention. However, one class of patents statutorily lacks the right to exclude direct infringers: surgical method patents are not enforceable against medical practitioners or health care facilities, which are the only realistic potential direct infringers of such patents. Despite this, inventors regularly file for (and receive) surgical method patents. Why would anyone incur the expense (more than $20,000 on average) of acquiring a patent on a surgical method if that patent cannot be used to keep people from using the patent?

The traditional answer …

“Either Secrecy, Or Legal Monopoly”: Why We Should Choose Fracking Patents, Sarah Spencer

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

The Nature Of Sequential Innovation, Christopher Buccafusco, Stefan Bechtold, Christopher Jon Sprigman

William & Mary Law Review

When creators and innovators take up a new task, they face a world of existing creative works, inventions, and ideas, some of which are governed by intellectual property (IP) rights. This presents a choice: Should the creator pay to license those rights? Or, alternatively, should the creator undertake to innovate around them? Our Article formulates this “build on/build around decision” as the fundamental feature of sequential creativity, and it maps a number of factors—some legal, some contextual—that affect how creators are likely to decide between building on existing IP or building around it. Importantly, creators are influenced by more than …

A Pasture Theory Of Creative Controls: A New Approach To Copyright And Patent Subject Matter Overgrowth, Maximilian Meese

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fixing Notice Failure: How To Tame The Trolls And Restore Balance To The Patent System, Mark Rawls

William & Mary Business Law Review

Patent litigation has become more frequent, more uncertain, and more expensive. Much of this can be traced to the rise of patent trolls asserting vague and uncertain software patents. Trolls have been derided as bringing frivolous and vexatious suits against productive companies, sapping the very same innovativeness that the patent system is supposed to encourage. Instead, companies are subject to nuisance-value suits as an ordinary course of business; for less established companies, such suits can threaten their very existence. Often, because of uncertain rules about claim construction and the granting of very broad patents, the accused infringer has no notice …

Extraterritoriality In U.S. Patent Law, Timothy R. Holbrook

William & Mary Law Review

Globalization has eroded traditional territorial limits on intellectual property laws. Although this pressure was first seen in trademark and copyright law, recent court decisions have demonstrated that the territorial lines of U.S. patents are also under assault. Indeed, the Supreme Court recently considered extraterritoriality in U.S. patent law in its 2007 decision in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., discussed thoroughly in this Article. Courts and commentators have offered two primary approaches to deal with the issue of the extraterritorial reach of U.S. patents. First, many courts, including the Supreme Court, continue to adhere to a strict view of a patent's …

Purging The Misuse - Suggestions For A Reasonable Balance Of Conflicting Policies, Alan J. Statman

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Law Reform: A Legislative Perspective Of An Extended Gestation, Hugh Scott, Dennis Unkovic

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Infringement In Government Procurements: Gao's Role, J. Edward Welch

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rules Defining The Use Of Trade Terms In Patent Applications, F. Prince Butler

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.