Law Commons^™

Repealing Patents, Christopher Beauchamp

Vanderbilt Law Review

The first known patent case in the United States courts did not enforce a patent. Instead, it sought to repeal one. The practice of cancelling granted patent rights has appeared in various forms over the past two-and-a-quarter centuries, from the earliest U.S. patent law in 1790 to the new regime of inter partes review and post-grant review. With the Supreme Court's recent scrutiny of the constitutionality of inter partes review, this history has taken on a new significance.

This Article uses new archival sources to uncover the history of patent cancellation during the first half-century of American patent law. These …

Can A Court Change The Law By Saying Nothing?, Paul R. Gugliuzza, Mark A. Lemley

Vanderbilt Law Review

Can an appellate court alter substantive law without writing an opinion? We attempt to answer that question by conducting a novel empirical investigation into how the Federal Circuit has implemented the Supreme Court's 2014 ruling in Alice v. CLS Bank, the most recent in a series of Supreme Court decisions strengthening patent law's patentable subject matter requirement. Our dataset includes each one of the Federal Circuit's more than 100 decisions on patentable subject matter in the three years since Alice, including affirmances issued without an opinion under Federal Circuit Rule 36. Including those no-opinion affirmances, the Federal Circuit has found …

Photocopies, Patents, And Knowledge Transfer: "The Uneasy Case" Of Justice Breyer's Patentable Subject Matter Jurisprudence, Dmitry Karshtedt

Vanderbilt Law Review

One aspect of Justice Stephen Breyer's discomfort with patents, as expressed in his opinion for the Supreme Court in Mayo v. Prometheus and his dissent from the order dismissing certiorari in LabCorp v. Metabolite, is strikingly similar to one of his critiques of copyright law in The Uneasy Case for Copyright, a well-known article he wrote as Professor Breyer more than forty-five years ago. In The Uneasy Case, Breyer argued that the burdens on duplication of technical articles imposed by copyright law restrict the flow of information and prevent scientists from enjoying spillover benefits of published research. His patent opinions …

Patently Impossible, Sean B. Seymore

Vanderbilt Law Review

The quest to achieve the impossible fuels creativity, spawns new fields of inquiry, illuminates old ones, and extends the frontiers of knowledge. It is difficult, however, to obtain a patent for an invention which seems impossible, incredible, or conflicts with well- established scientific principles. The principal patentability hurdle is operability, which an inventor cannot overcome if there is reason to doubt that the invention can really achieve the intended result. Despite its laudable gatekeeping role, this Article identifies two problems with the law of operability. First, though objective in theory, the operability analysis rests on subjective credibility assessments. These credibility …

Patents, Essential Medicines, And The Innovation Game, David W. Opderbeck

Vanderbilt Law Review

The once dusty arena of international patent law now hosts a life and death contest. Human rights activists claim patents restrict access to essential technologies in the developing world and skew research and development away from global health and welfare problems. Industrialized countries argue that innovation and development require strong patent protection. Both sides agree that much of the world lacks meaningful access to technologies that are basic to a healthy standard of living.

Current international patent rules strike an uneasy balance between these conflicting views about patents. The precarious nature of this balancing act is illustrated by the recent …

Elementary And Persistent Errors In The Economic Analysis Of Intellectual Property, Edmund W. Kitch

Vanderbilt Law Review

The literature on the economic analysis of intellectual property rights evidences a broad scholarly consensus on a number of central and important issues. First, intellectual property rights en- able economic actors to capture some of the benefits of the investment they make in establishing a good reputation, creating expressive works, and inventing new and improved technology. Absent intellectual property rights, copiers are free to take for themselves a significant part of the economic benefit generated by these types of investment and to undermine the incentive to make these in- vestments in the first place. Second, the investment activities induced by …

An Unhurried View Of Private Ordering In Information Transactions, Yochai Benkler

Vanderbilt Law Review

We stand at an unprecedented moment in the history of exclusive private rights in information ("EPRIs").' Technology has made it possible, it seems, to eliminate to a large extent one aspect of what makes information a public good-its nonexcludability. A series of laws-most explicitly the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") and the Uniform Computers Information Transactions Act ("UCITA")-are building on new technologies for controlling individual uses of information goods to facilitate a perfect enclosure of the information environment.

The purpose of this Essay is to explain why economic justifications interposed in favor of this aspect of the enclosure movement are, …

Lessons From Studying The International Economics Of Intellectual Property Rights

Vanderbilt Law Review

When the Uruguay Round negotiations began in 1986, the subject of intellectual property rights ("IPRs") was completely unfamiliar to international trade economists. Presumably the area was ignored because global trade policy concerns had not moved into questions of domestic business regulation. Even today, readers will search in vain for serious treatments of the trade implications of exclusive rights to intellectual property ("IP") in international economics textbooks.

Despite this general inattention, a small but growing literature has emerged in which trade economists have framed specific questions and applied theory and statistical analysis to them. This literature has advanced the understanding of …

Licensee Estoppel And Royalty Payments After Lear: Inconsistencies Within The Lower Courts Circumvent Lear Rationale, Henry P. Doggrell

Vanderbilt Law Review

Article I of the Constitution' expressly provides Congress with the authority to grant inventors exclusive rights to their discoveries for limited periods to promote the development of new ideas and innovations. By according the inventor-patentee the seventeen-year right either to exclude all others from making, using, or selling his invention or to contract for its limited use in the form of assignments or licenses, Congress has attempted to provide the initiative and incentive necessary to encourage the continued progress of science and the arts.' Moreover, statutory safeguards, which presume the validity of the patent until a contesting party establishes its …

Book Reviews, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

Since there has never been an era in which as much aggregate contemplation has been expended on the problems involved in the protection of literary property, Professor Patterson's book is both timely and important. The issues involved are being widely debated and discussed, but unfortunately much of the current discussion appears to be proceeding more from emotion, oratory, and vested concern than from detached and dispassionate logic. For this reason especially, the scholarly, sound history in Professor Patterson's new monograph is certain to be welcome, as it cuts through four centuries of continuing obfuscation and confusion and clarifies considerably the …

Problems In Joint Ownership Of Patents, Harrington A. Lackey

Vanderbilt Law Review

In that area of the law where rights in the products of mental conception are created, transferred and litigated, the general practitioner is often bewildered by the challenge to identify such rights with legal principles familiar to him. Although certain of these rights have arisen and are protected under our common law, patent rights are creatures of federal statutes authorized under our Constitution. Moreover, patents are identified as property, and under the 1952 Patent Act, they have been further classified as personal property. Here the confusion begins.