Law Commons^™

Real + Imaginary = Complex: Toward A Better Property Course, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

“Property” in most law schools means real property: the dense, illogical, and special-purpose body of land law. But this is wrong: property also comes in personal, intangible, and intellectual flavors—all of them more important to modern lawyers than land. Real property is deeply unrepresentative of property law, and focusing our teaching on it sells the subject short. A better property course would fully embrace these other forms of property as real property’s equals. Escaping the traditional but labyrinthine classifications of real property frees teachers to bring out the underlying conceptual coherence and unity of property law. The resulting course is …

Private Law And The Future Of Patents, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

As it operates today, patent law does not qualify as private law and, without change, I doubt it ever will. For some, this is as it should be and any private law aspects that remain in the patent system should be purged. The basic argument is that the dominant theory of patents is just not compatible with private law and patent doctrine should reflect a pure public law theoretical basis. I agree that today's dominant patent theory is incompatible with private law principles. Yet agreeing with that inherent incompatibility does not imply that doctrine needs to be reformed. There is …

A Crisis Of Faith & The Scientific Future Of Patent Theory, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The current reward framing for the patent system has resisted all attempts to either confirm or to refute the benefits of the system. Yet that should not surprise us. We should be surprised that we ever thought that the system could be justified at all. The reward framing has infected the patent system with pathological defects that make the system both unjustifiable and unfalsifiable. An alternate framing that focuses on ex ante technology transfer can support and explain many of the doctrinal features of the current patent system, but it can do so while avoiding the pathologies that plague today's …

Full Federal Circuit Curbs On Sale Bar's Threat To Patents, Zong-Qiang Bill Tian, Matthew D'Amore

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Unresolved Interpretive Ambiguity Of Patent Claims, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Claims are at the heart of every major patent related issue. Most importantly, they determine a patent's potent rights of exclusion. Yet, we cannot predict how courts will set the exact boundaries of claims. This renders smooth operation of the patent system near impossible. For some time, scholars have theorized that a basic policy disagreement is a source of this uncertainty. Some judges favor narrower patents, some favor broader and judges will naturally tend toward their policy preference. Policy disagreements result in claim uncertainty. Recently, scholars Tun- Jen Chiang and Lawrence Solum have taken this view further arguing that this …

The 2015 Changes To The Federal Rules Matter For Your Patent Case And Tech Business: Getting In The Courthouse Door Just Got Tougher, Matthew D'Amore

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Copyright For Literate Robots, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Almost by accident, copyright has concluded that copyright law is for humans only: reading performed by computers doesn't count as infringement. Conceptually, this makes sense: copyright's ideal of romantic readership involves humans writing for other humans. But in an age when more and more manipulation of copyrighted works is carried out by automated processes, this split between human reading (infringement) and robotic reading (exempt) has odd consequences and creates its own tendencies toward a copyright system in which humans occupy a surprisingly peripheral place. This essay describes the shifts in fair use law that brought us here and reflects on …

There's No Such Thing As A Computer-Authored Work - And It's A Good Thing, Too, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Treating computers as authors for copyright purposes is a non-solution to a non-problem. It is a non-solution because unless and until computer programs can qualify as persons in life and law, it does no practical good to call them "authors" when someone else will end up owning the copyright anyway. And it responds to a non-problem because there is nothing actually distinctive about computer-generated works.

There are five plausible ways in which computer-generated works might be considered meaningfully different from human-generated works: (1) they are embedded in digital copies, (2) people create them using computers rather than by hand, (3) …

Federal Circuit Addresses Damages In The Hatch-Waxman Context, Matthew D'Amore

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

When Nominal Is Reasonable: Damages For The Unpracticed Patent, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

To obtain a substantial patent damage award a patentee need not commercialize the patented invention; the patentee need only show that its patent was infringed. This surely incentivizes patenting but it dis-incentivizes innovation. Why commercialize yourself? The law allows you to wait for others to take the risks, and then you emerge later to lay claim to “in no event less than a reasonable” fraction of other people’s successes. It is rational to be a patent troll rather than an innovator. This troll-enabling interpretation of patent law’s reasonable royalty provision, however, is wrong as a matter of patent policy. Surprisingly, …

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

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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 …

Establishing An Island Of Patent Sanity, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

There is a growing, inescapable sense that something has gone terribly wrong with the patent system. The patent system is described as a failure, broken, and dysfunctional. Yet, despite the fact that much of today’s headline-grabbing patent activity appears facially unproductive, we really can’t be sure that the system has failed in its mission. Current patent theory is so indeterminate that it is hard to decisively criticize these activities. In fact, the current narrative cannot conclusively show that patent trolls or any other patent-related activities are or are not economically justified. Though depressing and perhaps embarrassing, this patent indeterminacy is …

Finding Invention, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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 …

Three Theories Of Copyright In Ratings, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Are ratings copyrightable? The answer depends on what ratings are. As a history of copyright in ratings shows, some courts treat them as unoriginal facts, some treat them as creative opinions, and some treat them as troubling self-fulfilling prophecies. The push and pull among these three theories explains why ratings are such a difficult boundary case for copyright, both doctrinally and theoretically. The fact-opinion tension creates a perverse incentive for raters: the less useful a rating, the more copyrightable it looks. Self-fulfilling ratings are the most troubling of all: copyright’s usual balance between incentives and access becomes indeterminate when ratings …

Maturing Patent Theory From Industrial Policy To Intellectual Property, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

We have always known that technological progress is important and this country has always aimed to promote it. A large part of that responsibility has fallen on the shoulders of the patent system. Embarrassingly, despite over two hundred years of experience, we still do not actually know if the patent system helps or hinders technological progress. This Essay argues that the problem is not the patent system but rather patent theory. Patent theory suffers from three linked problems: exceptionalness, indeterminacy, and animosity. First, patent law is seen as a necessarily unique exception to the overall market economy. By artificially making …

Rescuing The Invention From The Cult Of The Claim, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Patent law is certainly a specialized field but I didn’t think it would be a cult. The term ‘invention’ appears in many critical statutory locations. Yet we have been taught, perhaps brainwashed, to give the term zero substantive import. Substantive use of the invention has been purged from patent doctrine. Instead every substantive question in patent law is answered by reference to the claims, the legal descriptions of the ‘metes and bounds’ of a patent’s exclusionary reach. Despite its promise of precision and uniformity, our modern invention-less system is anything but precise and uniform. This article argues that the trouble …

Russia & Legal Harmonization: An Historical Inquiry Into Ip Reform As Global Convergence And Resistance, Boris N. Mamlyuk

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article examines several waves of intellectual property (IP) regulation reform in Russia, starting with an examination into early Soviet attempts to regulate intellectual property. Historical analysis is useful to illustrate areas of theoretical convergence, divergence, and tension between state ideology, positive law, and "law in action." The relevance of these tensions for post-Soviet legal reform may appear tenuous. However, insofar as IP enforcement has emerged as one of the largest hurdles for Russia's prolonged accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), these historical precedents may help explain Russia's apparent theoretical and political disconnect from the WTO. If Russian policymakers …

The Elephantine Google Books Settlement, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The genius - some would say the evil genius - of the proposed Google Books settlement was the way it fuses legal categories. The settlement raised important class action, copyright, and antitrust issues, among others. But just as an elephant is not merely a trunk plus legs plus a tail, the settlement was more than the sum of the individual issues it raised. These “issues” were really just different ways of describing a single, overriding issue of law and policy - a new way to concentrate an intellectual property industry.

In this essay, I argue for the critical importance of …

Rethinking The Concept Of Exclusion In Patent Law, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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 …

Principles Of The Law Of Software Contracts: Some Highlights, Robert A. Hillman, Maureen O'Rourke

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The final draft of the Principles of the Law of Software Contracts ("Principles") was unanimously approved by the American Law Institute membership in May of 2009. The goal of the project is to “clarify and unify the law of software transactions.” However, the Principles will not become law in any jurisdiction unless and until a court adopts them, so only time will tell whether the project will accomplish this goal. Nevertheless, one thing is certain. The current law of software transactions, a mish-mash of common law, Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, and federal intellectual property law, among other …

D Is For Digitize: An Introduction, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This symposium issue of the New York Law School Law Review collects seven articles springing from the D Is for Digitize conference on the Google Books lawsuit and settlement, held at New York Law School October 8-10, 2009. In the spirit of Chaucer's "good feyth," thirty panelists and over one hundred attendees (plus dozens more watching online) gathered to discuss the legal and social issues raised by the proposed settlement. For three days, lawyers, academics, librarians, programmers, and public-interest advocates met for a rich, respectful, and wide-ranging conversation on this once-in-a-lifetime settlement. These articles continue that conversation.

Contract Law In Context: The Case Of Software Contracts, Robert A. Hillman

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The membership of The American Law Institute unanimously approved the “Principles of the Law of Software Contracts” in May of 2009. In this essay for a symposium in the Wake Forest Law Review, I draw on my experience as Reporter on the ALI project to add my perspective on an interesting general question: Is specialization of contract law wise and, if so, in what contexts? I certainly cannot definitively answer the question of whether in the abstract society is better off with general or specialized law, but my experience in drafting the software rules, along with Associate Reporter, Maureen O'Rourke, …

Rethinking Consideration In The Electronic Age, Robert A. Hillman, Maureen O'Rourke

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Our fast-paced age of electronic agreements that ostensibly govern transactions as diverse as downloading software, ordering goods, and engaging in collaborative development projects raises questions regarding the suitability of contract law as the appropriate legal framework. While this question arises in many settings, we focus here on the free and open source software (FOSS) movement because of the maturity and success of its model and the ubiquity of its software. We explore in particular whether open source licenses are supported by consideration, and argue that they are, and that open source licenses are contracts. We further argue that a contractual …

The Ethical Visions Of Copyright Law, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This symposium essay explores the imagined ethics of copyright: the ethical stories that people tell to justify, make sense of, and challenge copyright law. Such ethical visions are everywhere in intellectual property discourse, and legal scholarship ought to pay more attention to them. The essay focuses on a deontic vision of reciprocity in the author-audience relationship, a set of linked claims that authors and audiences ought to respect each other and express this respect through voluntary transactions.

Versions of this default ethical vision animate groups as seemingly antagonistic as the music industry, file sharers, free software advocates, and Creative Commons. …

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

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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 …

Disease Management And Liability In The Human Genome Era, Larry I. Palmer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The completion of a rough draft of the Human Genome presents both tremendous potential for improvements in health care delivery and challenges to providing appropriate incentives that will bring forth new treatments while protecting individuals and groups from genetic discrimination. As "genetics" becomes an integral part of health care delivery, there are no existing coherent legal doctrines for balancing the risks and benefits of this technological and scientific achievement. Developing a coherent legal approach to these risks and benefits requires a reexamination of the purposes of the liability doctrines that govern the management of disease processes. At the moment, a …

The Antibiotics Class Actions, Charles W. Wolfram

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.