Law Commons^™

Antisocial Innovation, Christopher Buccafusco, Samuel N. Weinstein

Georgia Law Review

Innovation is a form of civic religion in the United States. In the popular imagination, innovators are heroic figures. Thomas Edison, Steve Jobs, and (for a while) Elizabeth Holmes were lauded for their vision and drive and seen to embody the American spirit of invention and improvement. For their part, politicians rarely miss a chance to trumpet their vision for boosting innovative activity. Popular and political culture alike treat innovation as an unalloyed good. And the law is deeply committed to fostering innovation, spending billions of dollars a year to make sure society has enough of it. But this sunny …

Compulsory Licensing: A Potential Solution To The Antitrust Dilemma Of Technology Standards Setting, Shen Peng

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

The Constitution grants patent owners exclusive rights over their inventions to “promote the Progress of Science.”1 This clause was drafted based on the belief that monetary incentives granted to the first inventor, such as the proceeds from selling and licensing the invention, will foster new ideas and accelerate innovation to the benefit of the public welfare. However, when the first inventor is the sole benefactor of the rewards from the innovation, subsequent innovation may be stifled.

For instance, the first person to invent the idea of a mobile phone but lacking the right to use the underlying technologies essential to …

Renewing Faith In Antitrust: Unveiling The Hidden Network Behind Pharmaceutical Product Hopping, Victoria Field

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

Patents grant time-limited market exclusivity to drug manufacturers, meaning that other companies are prohibited from copying and selling the patented pharmaceutical. This allows manufacturers to lawfully charge monopoly prices. Generic competition starts at the expiration of the patent. To maintain coveted monopoly power, manufacturers often release an alternative formulation of the drug with a fresh patent that enjoys continued market exclusivity. Manufacturers who can convert their consumer base to the new formulation can continue charging peak prices. This process, called “product hopping,” has been the target of significant antitrust inquiry, with mixed results.

A product hop may be the result …

The Music Industry: Drowning In The Stream, Jonathan Croskrey

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

The Department of Justice is reviewing two of it's oldest consent decrees, which were entered into with ASCAP and BMI. ASCAP and BMI are the two original performing rights organizations and existed well before streaming. This article analyzes copyright and antirust law through the lens of modern technology and the current landscape of the music industry. It examines whether the consent decrees should be removed or modified and what the consequences of each would be.

United States Supreme Court Ip Cases, 1810–2019: Measuring & Mapping The Citation Networks, Joseph Scott Miller

Catholic University Law Review

Intellectual property law in the United States, though shaped by key statutes, has long been a common-law field to a great degree. Many decades of decisional law flesh out the meaning of broad-textured, sparely worded statutes. Given the key roles of patent law and copyright law, both federal, the Supreme Court of the United States is i.p. law’s leading apex court. What are the major topical currents in the Supreme Court’s i.p. cases, both now and over the course of the Court’s work? This study uses network-analysis tools to measure and map the entirety of the Court’s i.p. jurisprudence. It …

“Sacrifice And Recoupment” In The Antitrust Analysis Of Patent Settlements: Actavis Through The Lens Of Brooke Group, Aspen Skiing, And Trinko, Bryan Gant

American University Business Law Review

Patent settlements are typically procompetitive, benefiting not only the settling parties but also the courts and the general public. But in rare cases patent settlements might instead harm competition, and thus raise antitrust concerns. How are courts to determine when antitrust scrutiny should — and, more importantly, should not — be applied to patent settlements? The answer ostensibly came in the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. Under Actavis, antitrust scrutiny of patent settlements may “sometimes” be appropriate where there is a “large,” “unexplained” “reverse payment” from the patentee to the patent challenger. Unless, that is, the …

Race Cartels: How Constructor Collaboration Is Curbing Innovation In Formula 1, Chandler C. Gerard-Reimer

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Formula 1 is in the midst of a copycat scandal: technology has made it possible for teams to reverse engineer clones of competitors’ race cars. This is a less than ideal state of affairs for the championship series, which prides itself on being the pinnacle of motorsport and automotive innovation, thanks in large part to the cars’ rapid rate of technological advancement. In order to address this problem, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), Formula 1’s governing body, must increase independent innovation efforts by amending the technical regulations to restrict the extent of presently allowed inter-team collaboration. Worried that the …

Can David Really Beat Goliath? A Look Into The Anti-Competitive Restrictions Of Apple Inc. And Google, Llc, Emily Feeley

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Movements, Moments, And The Eroding Antitrust Consensus, Michael Wolfe

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

Timothy Wu, The Curse of Bigness: Antitrust in the New Gilded Age (Columbia Global Reports, 2018). $14.99.

Timothy Wu’s book, The Curse of Bigness, offers a brief history on and critical perspective of antitrust law’s development over the last century, calling for a return to a Brandeisian approach to the law. In this review-essay, I use Wu’s text as a starting point to explore antitrust law’s current political moment. Tracing the dynamics at play in this debate and Wu’s role in it, I note areas underexplored in Wu’s text regarding the interplay of antitrust law with other forms of …

The New Madison Approach To Antitrust Law And Intellectual Property Law, Anita Alanko

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The New Madison Approach has recently been introduced by the Department of Justice Antitrust Division in an effort to address a weakening of patent rights in recent years. The approach has four premises: patent hold-up is not an antitrust problem, standard setting organizations should better protect against patent hold-out to ensure maximum incentives to innovate, patent holder injunction rights should be protected and not limited, and a unilateral and unconditional refusal to license a valid patent should be per se legal. After providing an introduction to the relevant law and terms of art, support and criticism of the New Madison …

Franchise Participants As Proper Patent Opponents: Walker Process Claims, Robert W. Emerson

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Franchise parties may be sued for patent infringement, or they may seek to sue others for an antitrust injury as the result of a fraudulently obtained patent. Indeed, franchisors and franchisees may simultaneously fall under both categories-sued for infringement but aggrieved because the very basis of that suit is illegitimate in their eyes. These franchise parties may turn for relief to a patent-validity challenge authorized in the seminal case Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machine & Chemical Corp. Franchise participants-franchisees and franchisors alike-may be the ideal Walker Process claimants. When these types of cases occur, the damages within the …

Intellectual Property For Breakfast: Market Power And Informative Symbols In The Marketplace, P. Sean Morris

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article continues to examine an important question: are trademarks a source of market power, or, put differently, when are trademarks an antitrust problem? This fundamental question is a cause of division among antitrust and intellectual property law scholars. However, by raising the question and presenting some scenarios that can provide answers, my hope is that contemporary antitrust and intellectual property scholars can explore some of its implications. As part of my own quest to address this question, I explore the proposition that creative deception and the wealth-generating capacity of trademarks are unorthodox elements that actually contribute to allegations of …

Update On Antitrust And Pay-For-Delay: Evaluating “No Authorized Generic” And “Exclusive License” Provisions In Hatch-Waxman Settlements, Saami Zain

San Diego Law Review

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, the United States Supreme Court held that a patent litigation settlement where a branded drug company pays a generic drug company to end the litigation and delay launching its generic may violate the antitrust laws. Although the decision ended years of controversy over whether such settlements were subject to antitrust scrutiny, many issues remain unresolved concerning the lawfulness of these settlements. In particular, courts have struggled in assessing the legality of patent settlements between branded and generic drug manufacturers involving non-cash compensation or benefits. This article discusses one type of non-cash compensation that is …

The Mystery Of Section 253(B), Matthew Gagnier

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

In 2014, Elon Musk, the renowned and socially-minded CEO of Tesla Motors, Inc., posted a blog on Tesla’s website that stated the company would be freeing up many of its patents involved in the creation of the company’s electric cars to any interested party. Yet again, Musk astounded the public by choosing the betterment of society over corporate profits—stirring up a more positive image than any other corporate personality. But there are numerous questions that Musk’s positive PR have drowned out: Where can you access the patents?; How did freeing up the patents get past the other executive officers and …

Counter-Ip Conspiracies: Patent Alienability And The Sherman Antitrust Act, Hannibal Travis

University of Miami Law Review

Anticompetitive collusion by intellectual property owners frequently triggered antitrust enforcement during the twentieth century. An emerging area of litigation and scholarship, however, involves conspiracies by potential licensees of intellectual property to reduce or eliminate opportunities by a property’s holders to profit from it, or even to recoup their investments in creating and protecting it. The danger is that potential licensees will collude with one another to suppress royalties or sale prices. This Article traces the history of such litigation, provides an overview of the scholarly and theoretical arguments against monopsonistic or oligopsonistic collusion against licensors of intellectual property, and summarizes …

The Ieee-Sa Revised Patent Policy And Its Definition Of “Reasonable” Rates: A Transatlantic Antitrust Divide?, Nicolas Petit

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standards Association’s (“IEEE-SA”) updated patent policy and a business review letter issued by the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) have caused much discussion in the United States. The purpose of this Article is to assess whether a similarly lenient antitrust approach to Standard Setting Organizations’ (“SSOs”) rate-setting policies would prevail under the European Union’s (“EU”) competition rules. Recent EU competition case law has promoted a very hard line in the area of coordinated conduct. Cases such as Dole Food Company, Inc. v. European Commission, T-Mobile Netherlands BV v. Raad van bestuur van …

Big Pharma Monopoly: Why Consumers Keep Landing On "Park Place" And How The Game Is Rigged, Mark S. Levy

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Circular Logic Of Actavis, Joshua B. Fischman

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Citizen Petitions: Long, Late-Filed, And At-Last Denied, Michael A. Carrier, Carl Minniti

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Promoting Access Over Ownership: Realigning Antitrust And Intellectual Property Law To Usher In An Era Of Collaborative Consumption, Adrian Kuenzler

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Following the US Supreme Court's endorsement of the promotion of consumer welfare as the single goal of antitrust and intellectual property laws, many courts have reasserted their commitment to the market access doctrine for antitrust and intellectual property law liability. These courts have rejected the Court's submission in GTE Sylvania to adhere to a strict output/profitability test concentrating predominantly on the positive and negative welfare effects regarding allegedly infringing conduct. This Article examines several important antitrust and intellectual property law decisions and locates within them a common flaw to express an intelligible, distinct doctrinal function for giving precedence to market …

Product Hopping: A New Framework, Michael A. Carrier, Steve D. Shadowen

Notre Dame Law Review

One of the most misunderstood and anticompetitive business behaviors in today’s economy is “product hopping,” which occurs when a brand-name pharmaceutical company switches from one version of a drug to another. These switches, benign in appearance but not necessarily in effect, can significantly decrease consumer welfare, impairing competition from generic drugs to an extent that greatly exceeds any gains from the “improved” branded product.

The antitrust analysis of product hopping is nuanced. It implicates the intersection of antitrust law, patent law, the Hatch-Waxman Act, and state drug product selection laws. In fact, the behavior is even more complex because it …

A Brave Attempt: Can The National Collegiate Athletic Association Sanction Colleges And Universities With Native American Mascots?, Kenneth B. Franklin

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

P, Mariana Lopez-Galdos

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

The paper tracks recent developments in the United States and EU competition systems with regard to the different policy tools used to address matters arising from the intersection of IP and competition policies. The analysis compares the enforcement and advocacy efforts carried out by the different antitrust agencies in the United States and EU.

This Article first traces how different authorities with antitrust mandates in the United States have dealt with the issue of balancing the rights of standard essential patent holders with innovation driven public welfare. This article then looks at how the antitrust authorities are using their antitrust …

Permissible Product Hopping: Why A Per Se Legal Rule Barring Antitrust Liability Is Necessary To Protect Future Innovation In The Pharmaceutical Industry, Michelle L. Ethier

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Pharmaceutical product hopping is a relatively new phenomenon in which a brand-name pharmaceutical company tactically reformulates a drug and patents the reformulation in an attempt to avoid competition by a generic competitor. When viewed in the context of the HatchWaxman framework, product hopping can effectively eliminate generic competitors from the market, thereby implicating § 2 of the Sherman Act. In addressing antitrust liability, this Note advocates a per se legal approach to product hopping so long as the hop is supported by a valid patent. Although some have argued that deference to the United States Patent and Trademark Office and …

Dueling Monologues On The Public Domain: What Digital Copyright Can Learn From Antitrust, Timothy K. Armstrong

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

This article, written for the inaugural volume of the University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal, explores the disconnect between contemporary United States intellectual property law and the often quite different consensus views of disinterested expert opinion. Questions concerning how copyright law treats the public domain (that is, uncopyrighted material) supply a lens for comparing the law as it stands with the law as scholars have suggested it should be. The ultimate goal is to understand why a quarter century of predominantly critical scholarship on intellectual property seems to have exerted such limited influence on Congress and …

The Ftc Has A Dog In The Patent Monopoly Fight: Will Antitrust’S Bite Kill Generic Challenges?, Jennifer D. Cieluch

Duke Law & Technology Review

Antitrust laws have been notoriously lenient in the patent realm, the underlying reason being that patents’ grant of exclusion create monopolies that defy antitrust laws in order to incentivize innovation. Thus, antitrust violations have rarely been found in the patent cases. But after the Supreme Court’s holding in FTC v. Actavis, brand name pharmaceutical companies may need to be more cautious when settling Hatch-Waxman litigation with potential patent infringers. Both brand-name drug manufacturers and generic drug manufacturers have incentives to settle cases by having the brand-name pay the generic in exchange for delaying their entry into the market. While courts …

The Rule Of Reason And The Scope Of The Patent, Herbert Hovenkamp

San Diego Law Review

For a century-and-a-half, the Supreme Court has described perceived abuses of patents as conduct that reaches "beyond the scope of the patent." That phrase, which evokes an image of boundary lines in real property, was applied to both government and private activity and came to have many different meanings. Sometimes it was used offensively to conclude that certain patent uses were unlawful because they extended beyond the scope of the patent. Later it came to be used defensively as well, to characterize activities as lawful if they did not extend beyond the patent's scope. In the first half of the …

Antitrust Issues In The Litigation And Settlement Of Infringement Claims, Deborah A. Coleman

Akron Law Review

Although the owner of intellectual property rights is privileged to enforce those rights through litigation and to settle such litigation on satisfactory terms, infringement actions or case settlements can create liability for antitrust violations or unfair competition. Most importantly, an agreement in restraint of trade is not sheltered from antitrust scrutiny because it is made in the context of settling threatened or actual infringement litigation. That a patent confers a limited legal monopoly in a product, method or process is only one fact that is taken into account in evaluating whether the terms under which infringement litigation is settled unfairly …

The New Plague: False Claims Liability Based On Inequitable Conduct During Patent Prosecution, Gregory Michael, William J. Newsom, Matthew Avery

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

In January 2009, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals filed a first of its kind qui tam suit on behalf of the federal government and several states alleging that its competitor, Aventis Pharma, violated the Federal False Claims Act (FCA) when it fraudulently acquired a patent and then overcharged the government for its patented drug. By utilizing a fraudulently acquired patent to elevate the price of Lovenox, a drug for treating deep-vein thrombosis, Amphastar alleged that Aventis had overcharged the government for every Lovenox pill purchased with government funds, including all prescriptions funded in part by Medicare or other federal insurance programs. The FCA …

The Essential Facilities Doctrine In Information Economies: Illustrating Why The Antitrust Duty To Deal Is Still Necessary In The New Economy, Maxwell Meadows

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.