Law Commons^™

Investigating Design, Jessica Silbey, Mark P. Mckenna

Faculty Scholarship

Design is ascendant. Steve Jobs’s legendary obsession with design was widely regarded as Apple’s comparative advantage, and that lesson has not been lost on its competitors. Design thinking is a growth industry, in business and at universities, and design professionals continue to take on increasingly significant roles within firms. The increasing economic significance of design has been reflected in an explosion of design patent applications and increasing amount of design litigation.

Despite design’s growing economic and legal importance, relatively little is known by legal scholars and policymakers about designers or the design process. This paper addresses that gap and is …

Design Patent Damages: A Critique Of The Government’S Proposed 4-Factor Test For Determining The “Article Of Manufacture”, Perry J. Saidman

IP Theory

The Supreme Court in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple, Inc. wrestled with the question of determining the meaning of “article of manufacture” in 35 U.S.C. § 289 when it comes to calculating the total profit of the infringer that is awarded to the patentee.

In its Petition for Certiorari, Samsung raised the novel theory that the article of manufacture could be less than the entire product sold by the infringer. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the following issue, as framed in Samsung’s Petition:

Where a design patent is applied to only a component of a product, should an …

A Patiently Offensive Test: Proposing Changes To The Test For Design Patent Infringement, Carl J. Hall

Valparaiso University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Greeted With A Shrug: The Impact Of The Community Design System On United States Law, Stacey Dogan

Faculty Scholarship

In an era of increased harmonization of intellectual property laws worldwide, the United States’ treatment of product design looks like an anomaly. Since the European Community Design System went into effect in 2002, advocates in the US have urged Congress to follow suit and adopt sui generis design protection, particularly for fashion. The US Congress, however, has resisted the call and left design protection to the existing standards of trademark, copyright and design patent law.

This Chapter explores some of the reasons that the Community Design System has had so little purchase in US debates over design. The rejection of …

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

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Claiming Design, Mark Mckenna

Journal Articles

Design stands out among intellectual property subject matter in terms of the extent of overlapping protection available. Different forms of intellectual property usually protect different aspects of a product. In the design context, however, precisely the same features are often subject to design patent, trademark, and copyright protection-and parties commonly claim more than one of those forms. Yet, as we show, the claiming regimes of these three forms of design protection differ in significant ways: the timing of claims; claim format (particularly whether the claims are visual or verbal); the multiplicity of claims (whether and how one can make multiple …

What's In, And What's Out: How Ip's Boundary Rules Shape Innovation, Mark Mckenna, Christopher J. Sprigman

Journal Articles

Intellectual property law sorts subject matter into a variety of different regimes, each with different terms of protection and different rules of protectability, infringement, and defenses. For that sorting to be effective, IP needs principles to distinguish the subject matter of each system. This paper focuses on one of the most important aspects of border-drawing that our IP system undertakes — identifying “useful” subject matter.

This aspect is critical because our IP system gives utility patent law pride of place and draws the boundaries of the other doctrines in large part to respect utility patent’s supremacy. Yet IP law’s sense …

Disclosing Designs, Jason Du Mont, Mark D. Janis

Vanderbilt Law Review

The disclosure function figures prominently in many accounts of the utility patent system. But what of its role in the design patent system? Should it be dismissed as trivial? And if so, what are the practical consequences for design patent doctrine in view of the fact that the doctrines that implement the disclosure function in utility patent law also apply to design patents by statutory mandate? The disclosure theory posits that patent documents disclose technical information that serves as a quid pro quo for the patent grant. Even aside from controversies about whether the disclosure function is robust for utility …

Beauty Fades: An Experimental Study Of Federal Court Design Patent Aesthetics, Dr. Andrew W. Torrance

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Functionality In Design Protection Systems, Jason J. Du Mont, Mark D. Janis

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Disclosing Designs, Mark D. Janis, Jason Du Mont

Articles by Maurer Faculty

While patent scholars have subjected disclosure doctrines to considerable scrutiny in the context of utility patent law, very little has been written about the role of those doctrines in design patent law. At first blush, this is not surprising: modern design patent documents usually contain short disclosures comprised primarily of drawings, accompanied by very little text. Although this might suggest limited aspirations for design patent disclosures, the story is more complex. Design patents contain only a pro forma claim; it is the disclosure that defines the scope of the protected design. Moreover, although the modern practice of relying primarily on …

Fonts, Typefaces, And Ip Protection: Getting To Just Right, Emily N. Evans

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Final Impression Counts - Seeking Common Ground In Design Patent Infringement, Dana Beldiman, Paolo Beconcini

Dana Beldiman

THE FINAL IMPRESSION COUNTS – Seeking Common Ground in Design Patent Infringement

Dana Beldiman*and Paolo Beconcini

Abstract

The visual appearance of products has become an asset of considerable economic value. Litigation surrounding it is increasingly common and has focused IP law on certain tensions that relate to the visual nature of IP assets.

One such area is design patent infringement. Policy mandates that comparison of two similar designs for purposes of evaluating infringement be performed by a notional purchaser, based on the overall impression of a design as whole. However, in performing the analysis courts are tempted to …

The Constitutionality Of Design Patents, Ralph D. Clifford, Richard J. Peltz-Steele

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

Design patents have been part of American law since 1842. In that time, only just over 600,000 design patents have been issued, with more than half of these being granted in the last twenty years. This quantity is dramatically fewer than the number of utility patents issued which is rapidly approaching 9,000,000 issued patents. Possibly because of the low usage of design patents over time, no case law and little literature address the constitutional issues raised by them. This article intends to overcome that shortcoming. Two constitutional aspects of design patents will be examined.

First, congressional authority to adopt the …

Progress And Competition In Design, Mark P. Mckenna, Katherine J. Strandburg

Mark P. McKenna

This article, prepared for a symposium on Design Patents in the Modern World, argues that applying patent-like doctrine to design makes sense only if a design patent system is premised on a patent-like conception of cumulative progress that permits patent examiners and courts to assess whether a novel design reflects a step of some magnitude beyond the prior art. If there is a meaningful way to speak of an inventive step in design, then design patent doctrine should be based on that conception. If nonobviousness has no sensible meaning in design, then a patent system makes no sense for design. …

Functional Signs And Decanters Of Wine: How Trade Dress Protection Unconstitutionally Extends Expired Design Patents, Tyler Jackson

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None.

Intellectual Property Issues In The Network Cloud: Virtual Models And Digital Three-Dimensional Printers, Darrell G. Mottley

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.

Functionality In Design Protection Systems, Mark D. Janis, Jason J. Du Mont

Jason John Du Mont

In comparison to functionality doctrine in trade dress cases, scholars have paid relatively little attention to the role of functionality doctrine in design protection systems such as the U.S. design patent system and the EU Community Design regime. Yet functionality considerations potentially affect many validity and scope determinations in the design protection area. In this Article, we critically evaluate judicial application of the functionality doctrine in design protection systems, focusing on the U.S. design patent and EU design protection regimes. We argue that the doctrine as applied in these settings is too often aimless and inconsistent. Some simple doctrinal refinements …

How Much Is Really At Stake?: Damages Statutes Collide In Multiple-Ip Litigation, Vanessa L. Otero

Vanessa L Otero

The statutes that govern damages for utility patents, design patents, and trade dress protection differ in ways that create potential conflicts when products infringe all three types of intellectual property. The purpose of this article is threefold: to provide an overview of current IP damages law, to present a case study, through an Apple v. Samsung case, on the unique problems that arise because of these laws, and to make a recommendation on how to avoid IP damages problems in future litigation.

Not (Necessarily) Narrower: Rethinking The Relative Scope Of Copyright Protection For Designs, Sarah Burstein

IP Theory

No abstract provided.

Progress And Competition In Design, Mark Mckenna, Katherine J. Strandburg

Journal Articles

This Article argues that applying patent-like doctrine to design makes sense only if a design patent system is premised on a patent-like conception of cumulative progress that permits patent examiners and courts to assess whether a novel design reflects a nonobvious step beyond the prior art. If there is a meaningful way to speak of such an inventive step in design, then design patent doctrine should be based on that conception. If nonobviousness has no sensible meaning in design, then a patent system cannot work for design. At present, design patent doctrine is in disarray because it is unmoored from …

Functionality In Design Protection Systems, Mark D. Janis, Jason J. Du Mont

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In comparison to functionality doctrine in trade dress cases, scholars have paid relatively little attention to the role of functionality doctrine in design protection systems such as the U.S. design patent system and the EU Community Design regime. Yet functionality considerations potentially affect many validity and scope determinations in the design protection area. In this Article, we critically evaluate judicial application of the functionality doctrine in design protection systems, focusing on the U.S. design patent and EU design protection regimes. We argue that the doctrine as applied in these settings is too often aimless and inconsistent. Some simple doctrinal refinements …

Overcoming The “Impossible Issue” Of Nonobviousness In Design Patents, Daniel Harris Brean, Janice M. Mueller

Daniel Harris Brean

Design Patents: An Alternative When The Low Standards Of Copyright Are Too High?, Ryan G. Vacca

ExpressO

The standard for copyright protection is notoriously low – the work must be independently created and possess a minimal degree of creativity. Nonetheless, even with that generous standard, the courts and the Copyright Office recognize that certain works do not contain even that minimum level of creativity such that they are categorically refused copyright protection. Blank forms, and other forms that do not convey information, fall within this category. In contrast, and for good reason, the standard for design patent protection is much more burdensome. The field of design patents protects new, original, ornamental, and non-obvious designs. This more difficult …

Copyright And Design Patents - The Common Zone Between, Albert P. Sharpe Iii

Cleveland State Law Review

The overlapping of our present-day Copyright and Design Patent Laws, apparently initially created by random legislative development and recently aggravated by the decision of the Supreme Court in Mazar v. Stein, has resulted in a legal morass of substantial proportions. The purpose of this paper is to explore briefly the influence which gave rise to this situation, to discuss the present state of the law and its practical impact upon the practicing patent advocate, and finally to review and evaluate proposed legislation, past and present, in an effort to determine the possible course of future developments.

Borderland - Where Copyright And Design Patent Meet, Richard W. Pogue

Michigan Law Review

Copyright law and design patent law contemplate basically different objects of protection. Yet at the outer fringes of these types of protection certain concepts overlap to form a rather undefined borderland in which it is difficult to say what law is applicable-copyright law, patent law, neither, or both. It is the purpose of this paper to explore this borderland area in the light of traditional copyright and patent law principles, with attention given to policy considerations involved, and to offer suggestions toward drawing a sharper boundary between the two.