Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 11 of 11

Full-Text Articles in Law

Snapshot Of Trade Secret Developments, Elizabeth A. Rowe Jan 2019

Snapshot Of Trade Secret Developments, Elizabeth A. Rowe

UF Law Faculty Publications

As we enter the second year post enactment of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, this Paper presents a snapshot of developments to assess whether there appear to be any significant doctrinal changes afoot in trade secret litigation, both civil and criminal, during the past year. I take a qualitative look at some of the substantive rulings from 2017 to date. My assessment based on this limited sampling is that there do not appear to be any dramatic changes to the doctrinal development of the law to date.

The paper highlights some noteworthy civil cases from select federal and state …


How Should Damages Be Calculated For Design Patent Infringement?, Mark D. Janis Jan 2018

How Should Damages Be Calculated For Design Patent Infringement?, Mark D. Janis

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Buying Monopoly: Antitrust Limits On Damages For Externally Acquired Patents, Erik N. Hovenkamp, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2017

Buying Monopoly: Antitrust Limits On Damages For Externally Acquired Patents, Erik N. Hovenkamp, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

The “monopoly” authorized by the Patent Act refers to the exclusionary power of individual patents. That is not the same thing as the acquisition of individual patent rights into portfolios that dominate a market, something that the Patent Act never justifies and that the antitrust laws rightfully prohibit.

Most patent assignments are procompetitive and serve to promote the efficient commercialization of patented inventions. However, patent acquisitions may also be used to combine substitute patents from external patentees, giving the acquirer an unearned monopoly position in the relevant technology market. A producer requires only one of the substitutes, but by acquiring …


Brief Amicus Curiae Of Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Neither Party: Halo Elecs. Inc. V. Pulse Elecs. Inc. And Stryker Corp. V. Zimmer, Inc., Christopher B. Seaman, Jason Rantanen Jan 2015

Brief Amicus Curiae Of Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Neither Party: Halo Elecs. Inc. V. Pulse Elecs. Inc. And Stryker Corp. V. Zimmer, Inc., Christopher B. Seaman, Jason Rantanen

Scholarly Articles

This amicus brief was filed on behalf of several intellectual property law professors in Halo v. Pulse and Stryker v. Zimmer regarding the appropriate standard for enhancing (increasing) damages under section 284 of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 284. It advances three primary arguments. First, it asserts that in light of the history of the statutory text and judicial precedent, willful infringement is the appropriate standard (and thus the only valid basis) for awarding enhanced damages under § 284. Second, it contends that Federal Circuit’s two-part, objective/subjective test for determining willfulness articulated in In re Seagate Technology, LLC, …


Food For Thought: Genetically Modified Seeds As De Facto Standard Essential Patents, Benjamin M. Cole, Brent J. Horton, Ryan G. Vacca Jan 2014

Food For Thought: Genetically Modified Seeds As De Facto Standard Essential Patents, Benjamin M. Cole, Brent J. Horton, Ryan G. Vacca

Akron Law Faculty Publications

For several years, courts have been improperly calculating damages in cases involving the unlicensed use of genetically-modified (GM) seed technology. In particular, when courts determine patent damages based on the hypothetical negotiation method, they err in exaggerating these damages to a point where no rational negotiator would agree. In response, we propose a limited affirmative defense of an implied license due to the patent’s status as a de facto standard essential patent. To be classified as a de facto standard essential patent, the farmer must prove three elements that reflect the peculiarities of GM seeds used in farming: (1) dominance, …


Food For Thought: Genetically Modified Seeds As De Facto Standard Essential Patents, Benjamin M. Cole, Brent J. Horton, Ryan G. Vacca Jan 2014

Food For Thought: Genetically Modified Seeds As De Facto Standard Essential Patents, Benjamin M. Cole, Brent J. Horton, Ryan G. Vacca

Law Faculty Scholarship

For several years, courts have been improperly calculating damages in cases involving the unlicensed use of genetically-modified (GM) seed technology. In particular, when courts determine patent damages based on the hypothetical negotiation method, they err in exaggerating these damages to a point where no rational negotiator would agree. In response, we propose a limited affirmative defense of an implied license due to the patent’s status as a de facto standard essential patent. To be classified as a de facto standard essential patent, the farmer must prove three elements that reflect the peculiarities of GM seeds used in farming: (1) dominance, …


Harm To Competition Or Innovation, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Apr 2013

Harm To Competition Or Innovation, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

This book of CASES AND MATERIALS ON INNOVATION AND COMPETITION POLICY is intended for educational use. The book is free for all to use subject to an open source license agreement. It differs from IP/antitrust casebooks in that it considers numerous sources of competition policy in addition to antitrust, including those that emanate from the intellectual property laws themselves, and also related issues such as the relationship between market structure and innovation, the competitive consequences of regulatory rules governing technology competition such as net neutrality and interconnection, misuse, the first sale doctrine, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Chapters …


Patent Attorney Malpractice: Case-Within-A-Case-Within-A-Case, Samuel Oddi Jan 2012

Patent Attorney Malpractice: Case-Within-A-Case-Within-A-Case, Samuel Oddi

Akron Law Faculty Publications

As literary devices, a “story-within-a story” and a “play-within-a-play” have a long lineage. Shakespeare seems to have been particularly fond of these devices. The legal analog may be seen as the “case-within-a-case” (“trial-within-a-trial,” “suit-within-a-suit”) arising in legal malpractice cases. The case-within-a-case terminology seems to be the most commonly used and hence will be used herein. While it is clear that the “case” is the malpractice case, it is not so clear what the “case-within-” is, which is usually referred to as the “underlying case.” Often, it seems to be presumed that the underlying case is limited to litigation, which would …


Notice And Patent Remedies, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2011

Notice And Patent Remedies, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

In private enforcement systems such as the one for patents, remedies perform the “public” function of determining the optimal amount of protection and deterrence. If every patent were properly granted and had just the right scope to incentivize innovation, then strict enforcement and harsh penalties for infringement would be a good idea. But in a world where too many patents are granted, their boundaries are often ambiguous and scope excessive, things are not so simple. The expected likelihood and magnitude of the penalty determines the number of infringement suits and the litigation resources that will be poured into them. As …


Patent Reform Act Of 2009: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 111th Cong., April 30, 2009 (Statement Of Professor John R. Thomas, Geo. U. L. Center), John R. Thomas Apr 2009

Patent Reform Act Of 2009: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 111th Cong., April 30, 2009 (Statement Of Professor John R. Thomas, Geo. U. L. Center), John R. Thomas

Testimony Before Congress

Two types of patent damages reforms have been proposed before the 111th Congress. One would effectively reinforce the existing ability of accused infringers to challenge expert testimony as failing to meet prevailing standards of relevancy and reliability.The other would clarify current standards for patent damages law. In my opinion, both sorts of reforms would potentially play signficant roles in bringing greater predictability to patent damages law, and both deserve further consideration.


Patent Infringement Damages In Japan And The United States: Will Increased Patent Infringement Damage Awards Revive The Japanese Economy?, Toshiko Takenaka Jan 2000

Patent Infringement Damages In Japan And The United States: Will Increased Patent Infringement Damage Awards Revive The Japanese Economy?, Toshiko Takenaka

Articles

This Article will look at the impact of the new Japanese legislation on patent infringement damages and will discuss whether the increase in damage awards contributes to the creation of breakthrough technology. To understand this impact, Part I will discuss pre-1998 legislation damages and highlight the difference between damages awarded by United States courts and those awarded by Japanese courts, by comparing United States and Japanese case examples. In examining the general tort and patent law theories, Part I will also try to identify the source of the difference and discuss how this difference is reflected in current United States …