Law Commons^™

Response: Systems Of Human And Intellectual Capital, Mark Mckenna, Brett F. Frischmann

Mark P. McKenna

This essay reviews Orly Lobel's article The New Cognitive Property: Human Capital Law and the Reach of Intellectual Property. It commends Professor Lobel for outlining the contours of the “new” field of human capital law, and for emphasizing the potential consequences of the growing enclosure of cognitive capacities in contemporary markets. From this starting point the essay makes two modest suggestions for researchers. First, it suggests that those building on Lobel’s work consider more contextual description and evaluation of human and intellectual capital production systems. Doing so would avoid overly abstract, macro-level analysis that is often divorced from reality and …

Where Tradition Meets Innovation: Providing A Practice-Oriented Curriculum, Andrea Lyon

Andrea D. Lyon

No abstract provided.

American Innovation And The Limits Of Patent Law: A Response To William Hubbard, Competitive Patent Law, Christopher B. Seaman

Christopher B. Seaman

In his recent article Competitive Patent Law, Professor William Hubbard makes a valuable contribution regarding an underexplored aspect of patent law’s ability to encourage innovation — namely, “whether U.S. patent law can be tailored to provide U.S. innovators with enhanced incentives to invent” compared to foreign rivals, and thus by extension make American firms more competitive in the global marketplace. This brief response addresses three aspects of Professor Hubbard’s thoughtful and well-written article. First, it critiques the article’s contention that the United States is currently facing an “innovation gap.” Second, it critically evaluates the claim that patent law can play …

Antitrust, Innovation, And Product Design In Platform Markets: Microsoft And Intel, William H. Page, Seldon J. Childers

William H. Page

The Antitrust Division’s Microsoft case and the Federal Trade Commission’s Intel case both rested on claims that antitrust intervention was necessary to preserve innovation in technological platforms at the heart of the personal computer. Yet, because those very platforms support markets that are among the most innovative in the American economy, injudicious intervention might well have jeopardized the very innovation that antitrust should promote. In this article, we review the role of platforms in technological innovation and consider how antitrust standards should apply to them. We then examine how Microsoft resolved antitrust issues affecting platform design at various stages of …

Through The Lens Of Innovation, Mirit Eyal-Cohen

Mirit Eyal-Cohen

The legal system constantly follows the footsteps of innovation and attempts to discourage its migration overseas. Yet, present legal rules that inform and explain entrepreneurial circumstances lack a core understanding of the concept of innovation. By its nature, law imposes order. It provides rules, remedies, and classifications that direct behavior in a consistent manner. Innovation turns on the contrary. It entails making creative judgments about the unknown. It involves adapting to disarray. It thrives on deviations as opposed to traditional causation. This Article argues that these differences matter. It demonstrates that current laws lock entrepreneurs into inefficient legal routes. Using …

Antitrust And The Patent System: A Reexamination, Herbert Hovenkamp

Herbert Hovenkamp

Since the federal antitrust laws were first passed they have cycled through extreme positions on the relationship between competition law and the patent system. Previous studies of antitrust and the patent system have generally assumed that patents are valid, discrete, and generally of high quality in the sense that they further innovation. As a result, increasing the returns to patenting increases the incentive to do socially valuable innovation. Further, if the returns to the patentee exceed the social losses caused by increased exclusion, the tradeoff is positive and antitrust should not interfere. If a patent does nothing to further innovation, …

Do Patent Licensing Demands Mean Innovation?, Robin C. Feldman, Mark A. Lemley

Robin C Feldman

Introduction: The Defend Trade Secrets Act Of 2015, Christopher B. Seaman

Christopher B. Seaman

Patentable Subject Matter As A Policy Lever, Amy L. Landers

Amy L. Landers

Patents are intended to be used as instruments to further policy. One potent policy driver to accomplish such goals is through the legal construction and application of the term “invention." Internationally, various legal authorities have recognized that this definition can be crafted in ways that are targeted to have real-world consequences. In the U.S., the open-ended framework of the Patent Act's section 101 invites judicial interpretation to effectuate the law's purposes. Ideally, these determinations should rest on articulated, transparent reasoning so that, under a common law system, those policies can serve as touchstones to ensure that the relevant precedents are …

The Anti-Patent: A Proposal For Startup Immunity, Amy L. Landers

Amy L. Landers

The controversy surrounding the current implementation of the patent system is well known. Some question whether the system has become entirely dysfunctional and disincentives innovation, particularly as the law operates within some industries. Moreover, early stage companies, particularly those just beginning to gain success, are particularly vulnerable targets for lawsuits. Notably, these same companies can be rich sources of important technological innovation.

Because the U.S. has always had a patent system, it is impossible to understand the intended and unintended consequences of eliminating this form of intellectual property protection even in a limited manner. As economist Fritz Machlup stated in …