Law Commons^™

The New Federal Anti-Dilution Act: Reinstating The Myth Of Likely Dilutive Harm As A Mask Anti-Free-Rider Liability, David Franklyn

Publications

The new federal anti-dilution act, the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 (the "TDRA"), promises to restore an anti-freerider tool to the hands of judges who wish to grant expansive trademark rights to famous mark owners. The impulse to provide this kind of relief is grounded in a sound principle: between the entity that created the famous mark and others who wish to profit from it in foreseeable collateral markets, the mark creator is usually the party that has a superior claim to capture that collateral value and to ensure the value of the mark for future exploitation in a …

Reason Or Madness: A Defense Of Copyright's Growing Pains, Marc H. Greenberg

Publications

A growing conflict between the creators and owners of expressive works protected by copyright law and the community of users and distributors of those works has focused on whether the law is so restrictive that it no longer meets the constitutional mandate that intellectual property law should serve to promote the growth and development of useful and expressive works. Has the scope of copyright's growth been reasonable, or are its restrictions madness, and harmful to the development and distribution of art? This article explores the seven leading criticisms leveled against copyright's expansion, and examines one recent effort at legislative reform …

Structural Rights In Privacy, Harry Surden

Publications

This Essay challenges the view that privacy interests are protected primarily by law. Based upon the understanding that society relies upon nonlegal devices such as markets, norms, and structure to regulate human behavior, this Essay calls attention to a class of regulatory devices known as latent structural constraints and provides a positive account of their role in regulating privacy. Structural constraints are physical or technological barriers which regulate conduct; they can be either explicit or latent. An example of an explicit structural constraint is a fence which is designed to prevent entry onto real property, thereby effectively enforcing property rights. …

Patents On Legal Methods? No Way!, Andrew A. Schwartz

Publications

An “invention,” as used in the United States patent laws, refers to anything made by man that employs or harnesses a law of nature or a naturally occurring substance for human benefit. A watermill, for instance, harnesses the power of gravity to run machinery. But legal methods, such as tax strategies, are not inventions in this sense, because they employ “laws of man” — not laws of nature to produce a useful result.

The Revision Of The Colorado Trademark Registration Statute, Arthur H. Travers

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Patent Office Meets The Poison Pill: Why Legal Methods Cannot Be Patented, Andrew A. Schwartz

Publications

In 2003, for the first time in its 170-year history, the United States Patent Office began awarding patents for novel legal innovations, in addition to traditional inventions such as the telephone or airplane. Commentators have accepted the Patent Office's power to grant legal method patents, but at the same time have criticized this new type of patent on policy grounds. But no one has suggested that the Patent Office exceeded its authority by awarding patents for legal methods, until now.

In the Patent Act of 1952, which is still in effect today, Congress established certain requirements for patentability, including a …

Should Property Or Liability Rules Govern Information?, Mark A. Lemley, Philip J. Weiser

Publications

This Article focuses on an unappreciated and significant aspect of the debate over property rules in the technology law context. In particular, it argues that the classic justification for legal entitlements protected by a property rule - i.e., a right to injunctive relief - depends on the ability to define and enforce property rights effectively. In the case of many technology markets, the inability to tailor injunctive relief so that it protects only the underlying right rather than also enjoining noninfringing conduct provides a powerful basis for using a liability rule (i.e., awarding the relevant damages to the plaintiff) instead …