Law Commons^™

Regulating Secrecy, W. Nicholson Price Ii

Articles

Inventors face a stark choice between two intellectual property systems of protecting innovative ideas: patents and trade secrecy. But accounts of this choice underexplore the role of the regulators that dominate some areas of innovation. Regulation interacts with intellectual property exclusivity in socially problematic ways by encouraging secrecy at the expense of innovation, efficiency, and competition. This Article theorizes how regulation empowers intellectual property generally, explains why this strengthening is problematic for trade secrecy but not for patents, and offers the solution of regulator-enforced disclosure. When a regulator defines a product or a process, it becomes much harder to successfully …

Big Data, Patents, And The Future Of Medicine, W. Nicholson Price Ii

Articles

Big data has tremendous potential to improve health care. Unfortunately, intellectual property law isn’t ready to support that leap. In the next wave of data- driven medicine, black-box medicine, researchers use sophisticated algorithms to examine huge troves of health data, finding complex, implicit relationships and making individualized assessments for patients. Black-box medicine offers potentially immense benefits, but also requires substantial high investment. Firms must develop new datasets, models, and validations, which are all nonrivalrous information goods with significant spillovers, requiring incentives for welfare-optimizing investment. Current intellectual property law fails to provide adequate incentives for black- box medicine. The Supreme Court …

Innovation Prizes In Practice And Theory, Michael J. Burstein, Fiona Murray

Articles

Innovation prizes in reality are significantly different from innovation prizes in theory. The former are familiar from popular accounts of historical prizes like the Longitude Prize: the government offers a set amount for a solution to a known problem, like £20,000 for a method of calculating longitude at sea. The latter are modeled as compensation to inventors in return for donating their inventions to the public domain. Neither the economic literature nor the policy literature that led to the 2010 America COMPETES Reauthorization Act — which made prizes a prominent tool of government innovation policy — provides a satisfying justification …

Manufacturing Barriers To Biologics Competition And Innovation, W. Nicholson Price Ii., Arti K. Rai

Articles

As finding breakthrough small-molecule drugs becomes more difficult, drug companies are increasingly turning to "large molecule" biologics. Although biologics represent many of the most promising new therapies for previously intractable diseases, they are extremely expensive. Moreover, the pathway for generic-type competition set up by Congress in 2010 is unlikely to yield significant cost savings. This Article provides a fresh diagnosis of and prescription for this major public policy problem. It argues that the key cause is pervasive trade secrecy in the complex area of biologics manufacturing. Under the current regime, this trade secrecy, combined with certain features of Food and …

Branding Taxation, Xuan-Thao Nguyen, Jeffrey A. Maine

Articles

Branding is important not only to businesses,but also to the economy. The intellectual property laws and tax laws should thus further the legitimate goals of encouraging and protecting brand investments while maintaining a sound tax base. Intellectual property protections for branding depend on advertisement and enforcement, both of which demand significant amounts of private investment by firms. Although one would expect similar tax treatments of both categories of investment, the categories are actually treated as vastly different for federal income tax purposes. Additionally, tax distinctions also exist within each category. The result is that some branding investments are expensed and …

Copyright's Illogical Exclusion Of Conceptual Art That Changes Over Time, Zahr K. Said

Articles

This Essay argues that copyright illogically excludes conceptual art from protection on the basis of fixation, given that well-settled case law has interpreted the fixation requirement to reach works that contain certain kinds of change so long as they are sufficiently repetitive to be deemed permanent. While conceptual art may perhaps be better left outside the scope of copyright protection on the basis of its failure to meet copyright’s other requirements, this Essay concludes that fixation should not be the basis on which to exclude conceptual art from protection.

There are of course both normative and descriptive questions around the …

Risky Ip, Andres Sawicki

Articles

No abstract provided.

Centering Education In The Next Great Copyright Act: A Response To Professor Jaszi, Deidre A. Keller, Anjali Vats

Articles

This article engages the recent Georgia State litigation regarding uses copyrighted content by teachers and seeks to place it within the larger context of the current state of affairs in education and in copyright policy making. In a recent article, Professor Peter Jaszi argued that educators need to begin to articulate the ways in which their uses are transformative in order to increase their chances of winning copyright infringement suits on the basis of fair use. While Jaszi’s point that educators need to better articulate their rights to use copyrighted content is well-taken, we argue that the appropriate audience educators …

What Notice Did, Jessica D. Litman

Articles

In the twenty-first century, copyright protection is automatic. It vests in eligible works the instant that those works are first embodied in a tangible format. Many Americans are unaware of that, believing instead that registration and copyright notice are required to secure a copyright. That impression is understandable. For its first 199 years, United States copyright law required authors to take affirmative steps to obtain copyright protection. The first U.S. copyright statute, enacted by Congress in 1790, required the eligible author of an eligible work to record the title of the work with the clerk of the court in the …

Patented Electric Guitar Pickups And The Creation Of Modern Music Genres, Sean M. O'Connor

Articles

This Essay provides an overview of how patents played a core role in developing world-changing musical genres. This may be surprising, as normally copyright law is associated with incentivizing advances in the creative arts. But as this Conference’s theme [The IP Platform: Supporting Invention and Inspiration] and presentations emphasize, the whole range of intellectual property (“IP”), especially when viewed as a platform, supports innovation across the spectrum of human ingenuity and creativity.

This Essay is also intended to be read in conjunction with a viewing of the live-music demonstration of how pickups transformed popular music, delivered at the Conference and …

Judicial Wisdom Or Patent Envy? The Eleventh, Seventh And Federal Circuits’ Patent Jurisdictional Battle, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Articles

This article observes a startling new appellate jurisdictional battle waged by regional circuit courts to chip away the Federal Circuit's exclusive jurisdiction in patent cases. The Eleventh Circuit took an unprecedented step by engaging in patent claim construction and infringement under literal infringement analysis and the doctrine of equivalents analysis. In a case of first impression, the Eleventh Circuit asserted that it legitimately has appellate jurisdiction to decide cases involving substantive patent law. Instead of grabbing jurisdiction, the Seventh Circuit, through its Chief Judge, grabbed public attention by advocating for the abolishment of the Federal Circuit's exclusive jurisdiction over patent …

Innovation, The State And Private Enterprise: A Corporate Lawyer's Perspective, Charles M. Yablon

Articles

This is a review essay based on an important recent book, The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths, by Mariana Mazzucato, a Professor of the Economics of Innovation. In that book, Professor Mazzucato explains how the U.S. Government, acting as an “entrepreneurial state” has made the critical investments in technologies that have given rise to multi-billion dollar new industries. Mazzucato argues that only the State currently has the funds and incentives necessary to finance the earliest and most important phases of the innovation process, investments the private sector cannot and will not make. Mazzucato’s defense of the centrality …