Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Third-Party Interests And The Property Law Misfit In Patent Law, Sarah Rajec
Third-Party Interests And The Property Law Misfit In Patent Law, Sarah Rajec
Faculty Publications
Courts and scholars have long parsed the characteristics of patent grants and likened them, alternately, to real or personal property law, monopolies, public franchises and other regulatory grants, or a hybrid of these. The characterizations matter, because they can determine how patents are treated for the purposes of administrative review, limitations, and remedies, inter alia. And these varied treatments in turn affect incentives to innovate. Patents are often likened to real property in an effort to maximize rights and allow inventors to internalize all of the benefits from their activities. And courts often turn first to real property analogies when …
Guest Post Out Of The Blue The Federal Circuit Devises A New Rule For Color Mark, Christine Farley
Guest Post Out Of The Blue The Federal Circuit Devises A New Rule For Color Mark, Christine Farley
Editorial Contributions
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that color marks on product packaging can be inherently distinctive. On April 8, 2020, the court issued its opinion in In re: Forney Industries, Inc. It stated that “a distinct color-based product packaging mark can indicate the source of the goods to a consumer, and, therefore, can be inherently distinctive.”URL: https://patentlyo.com/patent/2020/04/federal-circuit-devises.html
Google V. Oracle Amicus Merits Stage Brief: Vindicating Ip’S Channeling Principle And Restoring Jurisdictional Balance To Software Copyright Protection, Peter Menell, David Nimmer, Shyamkrishna Balganesh
Google V. Oracle Amicus Merits Stage Brief: Vindicating Ip’S Channeling Principle And Restoring Jurisdictional Balance To Software Copyright Protection, Peter Menell, David Nimmer, Shyamkrishna Balganesh
All Faculty Scholarship
The Federal Circuit’s decisions in Oracle v. Google conflict with this Court’s seminal decision in Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 99 (1879), misinterpret Congress’s codification of this Court’s fundamental channeling principle and related limiting doctrines, and upend nearly three decades of sound, well-settled, and critically important decisions of multiple regional circuits on the scope of copyright protection for computer software. Based on the fundamental channeling principle enunciated in Baker v. Selden, as reflected in § 102(b) of the Copyright Act, the functional requirements of APIs for computer systems and devices, like the internal workings of other machines, are …
Wipo Conversation On Intellectual Property (Ip) And Artificial Intelligence (Ai), Sean Flynn
Wipo Conversation On Intellectual Property (Ip) And Artificial Intelligence (Ai), Sean Flynn
Working Papers
No abstract provided.
Right On Time: A Reply To Professors Allen, Claeys, Epstein, Gordon, Holbrook, Mossoff, Rose, And Van Houweling, Dotan Oliar, James Y. Stern
Right On Time: A Reply To Professors Allen, Claeys, Epstein, Gordon, Holbrook, Mossoff, Rose, And Van Houweling, Dotan Oliar, James Y. Stern
Faculty Publications
A simple observation started us off in writing Right on Time. Studying and teaching intellectual property law, we noticed striking parallels between traditional first possession rules in property law and analagous rules governing the acquisition of patent, copyright, and trademark rights. We thought that established first possession principles could illuminate the workings of IP law. As we dug in, however, it became increasingly clear that our premise wasn’t quite right. While many penetrating commentators had said many penetrating things about first possession, the leading treatments tended to focus on significant individual aspects of the overall issue. What we could …
Unregistered Complaints, Christine Galbraith Davik
Unregistered Complaints, Christine Galbraith Davik
Faculty Publications
In March, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its highly-anticipated decision in Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corporation v. Wall-Street.com, LLC which resolved a split among U.S. Court of Appeals concerning the point in time when a copyright owner is first able to file suit against an alleged infringer. While at first glance this case may merely appear to be a simple issue of statutory interpretation, namely whether it is upon application for registration or once a determination has been made on registration by the U.S. Copyright Office, I argue this decision is a clarion call for a much-needed amendment to …
The Harmonization Myth In International Intellectual Property Law, Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec
The Harmonization Myth In International Intellectual Property Law, Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec
Faculty Publications
There is a dominant narrative in international intellectual property ("IP") law of ever-increasing harmonization. This narrative has been deployed in ways descriptive, prescriptive, and instrumental: approximating the historical trend, providing justification, and establishing the path forward. Appeals to harmonization are attractive. They evoke a worldwide partnership and shared sacrifice to meet the goals of innovation and access to technology through certainty, efficiency, and increased competition through lowered trade barriers. Countries with strong IP protections consistently and successfully tout the importance of certainty and lower trade barriers when seeking new and stronger protections from countries with lower levels of protection. Yet …
Patently Risky: Framing, Innovation And Entrepreneurial Preferences, Elizabeth Hoffman, David L. Schwartz, Matthew L. Spitzer, Eric L. Talley
Patently Risky: Framing, Innovation And Entrepreneurial Preferences, Elizabeth Hoffman, David L. Schwartz, Matthew L. Spitzer, Eric L. Talley
Faculty Scholarship
An emerging common wisdom holds that courts have made it “too hard” to obtain patent protection in critical industries. The origin of this criticism dates back at least as far as the United States Supreme Court’s 2012 landmark opinion in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. which (the argument goes) triggered a chain reaction of judicial opinions rendering patent rights progressively more difficult to secure. Two years later, the Supreme Court decided Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, another opinion widely viewed as restricting patent rights. And, barely three years after Mayo, the Federal Circuit cited it in …