Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Limiting Downstream Effects Of Patent Licensing Activity In Software And Electronics: An Argument For Alienability Of Patent Licenses To Licensees' Business Successors, Anna A. Onley
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Frustrating the ability to transfer ownership is costly, and non-creative entities (NCEs) may contribute to rising costs of innovation by contractually requiring their licensees to seek NCE consent to subsequent license transfers. One possible way of gradually limiting the reach of NCEs in this area is to expand the doctrine of patent misuse—which supports the unenforceability defense to patent infringement—to construe restraints on alienation of patent licenses as patent misuse. This narrowly tailored approach, discussed in this Note, minimizes the risk of negative impact on the patent system because it avoids the question of patent invalidity and does not seek …
When Is A Patent Exhausted? Licensing Patents On A Claim-By-Claim Basis, Lucas Dahlin
When Is A Patent Exhausted? Licensing Patents On A Claim-By-Claim Basis, Lucas Dahlin
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The patent exhaustion doctrine is meant to protect legitimate purchasers of patented items from post-sale restrictions imposed by patent owners. The courts, however, have recently expanded the doctrine of patent exhaustion by holding that the sale of a device which “partially” practices a patent exhausts that patent in its entirety. This holding essentially precludes patent owners from licensing their patents on a claim-by-claim basis. As inventions become more complex and require more parties working in concert to bring an idea to market, the inability to license patents on a claim-by-claim basis will lead to inventors being unable to fully monetize …
Technically Speaking, Does It Matter? An Empirical Study Linking The Federal Circuit Judges' Technical Backgrounds To How They Analyze The Section 112 Enablement And Written Description Requirements, Dunstan H. Barnes
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Patent cases are decided exclusively by federal judges, who—unlike patent attorneys appearing before the United States Patent and Trademark Office—are not required to have any scientific or technical qualifications. The present empirical study explores whether there is a correlation between the technical backgrounds of judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and these judges’ analysis of the enablement and written description patent requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 112. The results indicate that Federal Circuit judges with technical backgrounds are more likely than their non-technical peers to reverse lower courts, but not significantly more likely to …
Markedly Low: An Argument To Raise The Burden Of Proof For Patent False Marking, Caroline Ayres Teichner
Markedly Low: An Argument To Raise The Burden Of Proof For Patent False Marking, Caroline Ayres Teichner
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The Federal Circuit's liberal treatment of the patent false-marking statute, 35 U.S.C. § 292, has created a climate in which opportunistic qui tam plaintiffs facing a low burden of proof can recover potentially enormous sums of money under the statute with no showing of competitive injury. This note argues that the Federal Circuit erred by ruling that plaintiffs must prove the key element of false-marking claims—namely, intent to deceive the public—by a mere preponderance of the evidence, and further contends that the court should have adopted the clear and convincing standard instead. Support for this elevated burden of proof can …
"Willful Patent Filing": A Criminal Procedure Protecting Traditional Knowledge, Vincent M. Smoczynski
"Willful Patent Filing": A Criminal Procedure Protecting Traditional Knowledge, Vincent M. Smoczynski
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This article explores the interaction between current intellectual property regimes and traditional knowledge and concludes that national laws currently in place inadequately protect traditional knowledge holders. When property rights are granted on traditional knowledge, the effects can extend not only to the indigenous communities, but to the surrounding ecosystems and the global market. Commercialization and increased demand leads to shortages in natural resources and increased prices. Therefore, in order to ensure that patent applicants are deterred from acquiring property rights in traditional knowledge, as well that traditional knowledge holders receive proper benefits for their labor and knowledge, this article advocates …
Patenting Cryptographic Technology, Greg Vetter
Patenting Cryptographic Technology, Greg Vetter
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The policy concerns intersecting patent law and cryptographic technology relate to the technology's beneficial uses in securing information in a commercial and social fabric that increasingly relies on computing and electronic communications for its makeup. The presence of patenting in a technology can impact diffusion of interoperable technology. Standardized embeddable cryptography facilitates its supply. Patent law for several decades has waxed and waned in its embrace of software implemented inventions rooted in abstract ideas such as the mathematics and mathematical algorithms underlying modern cryptography. This article documents the growth of cryptographic patenting. Then, in light of this growth and patent …
Willful Patent Infringement After In Re Seagate: Just What Is "Objectively Reckless" Infringement?, Randy R. Micheletti
Willful Patent Infringement After In Re Seagate: Just What Is "Objectively Reckless" Infringement?, Randy R. Micheletti
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Recently the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dramatically change the rules for proving willful patent infringement—and justifying enhanced damages—in In re Seagate Technology. A patentee alleging willful infringement must now first prove "by clear and convincing evidence that the infringer acted despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a valid patent." He must then show that the objectively defined risk was "either known or so obvious that it should have been known to the accused infringer." The court expressly delegated substantive development of the new test to future cases. Because district …