Law Commons^™

Reinventing Copyright And Patent, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky

Michigan Law Review

Intellectual property systems all over the world are modeled on a one-size-fitsall principle. However important or unimportant, inventions and original works receive the same scope of protection, for the same period of time, backed by the same variety of legal remedies. Essentially, all intellectual property is equal under the law. This equality comes at a heavy price, however. The equality principle gives all creators access to the same remedies, even when those remedies create perverse litigation incentives. Moreover, society overpays for innovation through more monopoly losses than are strictly necessary to incentivize production. In this Article, we propose a solution …

Improving Patent Quality With Applicant Incentives, Stephen Yelderman

Stephen Yelderman

This Article offers an alternative approach to the widely recognized problem of low-quality patents being granted by the patent office. Traditional reforms have focused almost exclusively on making the patent office more effective at examination. This Article instead looks at patent quality from an applicant’s perspective, and evaluates how certain patent rules might be encouraging inventors to file higher or lower quality claims. It proposes a variety of reforms to take advantage of applicants’ existing interests in obtaining patents that are both broad enough to create infringing activity and narrow enough to be valid. The result is a distinctive set …

The Patent Reform Debate: Has Patent Overprotection Resulted In Not-So-Smartphones?, Ryan A. Kraski

Pace Intellectual Property, Sports & Entertainment Law Forum

This Article discusses the issue of excessive patent protection and possible remedies; the discussed remedies are the usage of antitrust laws or simply replacing certain patents with copyright protection. This Article first explores the relationship between patent protection and antitrust law. It then describes a number of tests that have been used in the past and one proposed new test, designed to confront this interrelationship. While considering these tests, this Article applies two controversial real-world patents to each in order to examine their benefits and problems. This Article then goes on to discuss the possible benefits of protecting inventors through …

Markets And Patent Enforcement: A Comparative Investigation Of Non-Practicing Entities In The Unitedstates And Europe, Stefania Fusco

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Is it true that non-practicing entities (NPEs) are primarily a U.S. phenomenon? Over time, several definitions of NPEs have been presented. They range from research institutions that hold patent portfolios for their inventions but do not develop and commercialize any products, to IP asset management firms whose exclusive business is asserting patent claims to collect significant fees from companies operating in certain industries. The latter are also referred to as “patent trolls” and have been the subject of significant debate as to their role in the innovative process in different fields. NPEs are a relatively new phenomenon. Studies have shown …

Holding Up And Holding Out, Colleen V. Chien

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Patent “hold-up” and patent “hold-out” present important, alternative theories for what ails the patent system. Patent “hold-up” occurs when a patent owner sues a company when it is most vulnerable—after it has implemented a technology—and is able wrest a settlement because it is too late for the company to change course. Patent “hold-out” is the practice of companies routinely ignoring patents and resisting patent owner demands because the odds of getting caught are small. Hold-up has arguably predicted the current patent crises, and the ex ante assertion of technology patents whether in the smartphone war, standards, or patent “troll” context. …

Patent Dialogue, Jonas Anderson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

This Article examines the unique dialogic relationship that exists between the Supreme Court and Congress concerning patent law. In most areas of the law, Congress and the Supreme Court engage directly with each other to craft legal rules. When it comes to patent law, however, Congress and the Court often interact via an intermediary institution: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In patent law, dialogue often begins when Congress or the Supreme Court acts as a dialogic catalyst, signaling reform priorities to which the Federal Circuit often responds.

Appreciating the unique nature of patent dialogue has important …

Congress As A Catalyst Of Patent Reform At The Federal Circuit, Jonas Anderson

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Minimizing The Costs Of Patent Trolling, Vincent R. Johnson

Faculty Articles

Patent trolling is a serious legal problem. In addressing patent trolling, disclosure requirements and periodic reporting standards will be critical to minimizing the costs of this controversial practice.

Patent trolling, at its most problematic, generally refers to patent infringement allegations made by non-practicing entities (NPEs) which produce essentially no products or services except in connection with the buying and selling of patent rights. The targets of these patent “trolls” often lack basic information that is relevant to their evaluation of the claims against them, and policymakers know too little about specialized patent assertion entities and their impact on innovation and …

Patent Examiners And Litigation Outcomes, Shine Tu

Law Faculty Scholarship

Conventional wisdom argues that unnecessary litigation of low quality patents hinders innovation, and that the PTO could play a role with its high grant rates. Accordingly, it is important to answer these questions: (1) which patent examiners are issuing litigated patents, (2) are examiners who are "rubber stamping" patents issuing litigated patents at a disproportionately higher rate, and (3) are examiners with less experience issuing more litigated patents? In sum, do patent examiners who issue litigated patents have common characteristics? Intuition would argue that those examiners who issue the most patents (approximately one patent every three business days) would exhibit …