Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Biotechnology (1)
- Commercial Speech (1)
- Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1)
- DNA (1)
- Deceptive (1)
-
- Eli Lilly (1)
- Enzo (1)
- Falkner (1)
- Fame (1)
- Immoral (1)
- Infamy (1)
- Lanham Act (1)
- Lizardtech (1)
- Mark (1)
- Marks (1)
- PTO (1)
- Patent (1)
- Patent and Trademark Office (1)
- Proteins (1)
- Scandalous (1)
- Scandalous Registration (1)
- Trademark (1)
- Trademark Dilution Act (1)
- Trademark Registration (1)
- Wnablement (1)
- Written Description (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
To Live In In-‘Fame’-Y: Reconceiving Scandalous Marks As Analogous To Famous Marks, Jasmine C. Abdel-Khalik
To Live In In-‘Fame’-Y: Reconceiving Scandalous Marks As Analogous To Famous Marks, Jasmine C. Abdel-Khalik
Faculty Works
In 1905, Congress enacted a revised trademark registration act, which included a prohibition on registering marks containing or consisting of scandalous or immoral material. Because Congress failed to provide any further guidance either in legislative history or in the statutory language, administrative bodies and the courts have struggled to define this standard. Over the past century, decisions applying this prohibition have been inconsistent. The general public and potential trademark owners are unable to predict accurately if a mark will be accepted or refused for federal registration, which has some significant benefits. Perhaps because of this uncertainty, some estimate that hundreds …
Is Lilly Written Description Paper Tiger?: Comprehensive Assessment Of The Impact Of Eli Lilly And Its Progeny In The Courts And Pto, Christopher M. Holman
Is Lilly Written Description Paper Tiger?: Comprehensive Assessment Of The Impact Of Eli Lilly And Its Progeny In The Courts And Pto, Christopher M. Holman
Faculty Works
In University of California v. Eli Lilly, decided by the Federal Circuit in 1997, the court established for the first time a new form of patent law's written description requirement, apparently targeted specifically at biotechnology. To this day, the conventional wisdom is that the so-called Lilly written description requirement (LWD) exists as a biotechnology-specific super-enablement requirement, substantially more stringent than the enablement requirement (the conventional standard for patentability), and standing as an impediment to effective patent protection for biotechnology inventions. My objective in writing this article was to test this conventional wisdom, by conducting a comprehensive search for all LWD …