Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Intellectual Property Law (408)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (61)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (60)
- Law and Economics (58)
- Business (57)
-
- Science and Technology Law (56)
- Technology and Innovation (45)
- Courts (30)
- Health Law and Policy (29)
- Economics (25)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (22)
- Food and Drug Law (21)
- Industrial Organization (19)
- Law and Society (17)
- Administrative Law (16)
- International Law (16)
- Legal History (15)
- Medicine and Health Sciences (14)
- Economic Policy (13)
- Life Sciences (13)
- Litigation (13)
- Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation (13)
- Engineering (12)
- Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations (12)
- Legislation (12)
- Library and Information Science (12)
- Science and Technology Policy (11)
- Supreme Court of the United States (9)
- Education (8)
- Institution
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (64)
- Boston University School of Law (40)
- University of New Hampshire (34)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (29)
- Duke Law (27)
-
- Santa Clara Law (21)
- University of Missouri School of Law (17)
- University of Richmond (14)
- American University Washington College of Law (13)
- University of Washington School of Law (12)
- University of Georgia School of Law (11)
- West Virginia University (11)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (10)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (10)
- University of Michigan Law School (10)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (9)
- Southern Methodist University (9)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (8)
- William & Mary Law School (8)
- George Washington University Law School (7)
- Columbia Law School (6)
- Cornell University Law School (6)
- New York Law School (6)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (6)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (6)
- Sacred Heart University (5)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (5)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (4)
- University of Baltimore Law (4)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (4)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (98)
- All Faculty Scholarship (75)
- Faculty Publications (50)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (41)
- Faculty Works (29)
-
- Articles (20)
- Scholarly Works (15)
- Law Faculty Publications (13)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (10)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (9)
- Utah Law Faculty Scholarship (9)
- GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works (7)
- Articles & Chapters (6)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (6)
- Supreme Court Case Files (6)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (5)
- Librarian Publications (5)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (5)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (4)
- Faculty & Staff Scholarship (4)
- Journal Articles (4)
- Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series (3)
- Scholarly Articles (3)
- Scholarly Publications (3)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (3)
- Akron Law Faculty Publications (2)
- Book Reviews (2)
- College of Law Faculty (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
- File Type
Articles 481 - 490 of 490
Full-Text Articles in Law
Patent Arbitration: Past, Present And Future, Thomas G. Field Jr
Patent Arbitration: Past, Present And Future, Thomas G. Field Jr
Law Faculty Scholarship
Most attorneys have heard of arbitration, but few have more than a vague idea of what it is or have any experience with it. Patent attorneys are no exception, and many are no doubt wondering about the implications of §294. It was enacted in August of 1982, and went into effect in February 1983: Why was it needed and passed, and what does it mean?
Diamond V. Diehr, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Diamond V. Bradley, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Diamond V. Bradley, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Diamond V. Chakrabarty, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Diamond V. Chakrabarty, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Post Hoc Evaluations Of Obviousness: Preliminary Report Of An Attempt To Identify, Empirically, The Characteristics Of A Superior Evaluator, Juanita V. Field, Thomas G. Field Jr.
Post Hoc Evaluations Of Obviousness: Preliminary Report Of An Attempt To Identify, Empirically, The Characteristics Of A Superior Evaluator, Juanita V. Field, Thomas G. Field Jr.
Law Faculty Scholarship
Over a century and a quarter have passed since the Supreme Court in Hotchkiss v. Greenwood held that more than mere novelty is necessary to support a valid patent. Congress, after 100 years of experience with a concept which came to be called "invention," attempted to improve the situation by requiring that an invention not be "obvious" if it is to be patented. It seems safe to say that in the intervening time the doctrine of non-obviousness has not developed into a foolproof yardstick for measuring the quality of cerebral or other effort necessary to make an advance over the …
Parker V. Flook, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Dann V. Johnston, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Intellectual And Industrial Property In A Nutshell, Thomas G. Field Jr.
Intellectual And Industrial Property In A Nutshell, Thomas G. Field Jr.
Law Faculty Scholarship
First, intellectual and industrial property is property--extremely valuable property at that. However, this is not a subject that gets more than passing attention in many curricula, and none in most. Consequently, few lawyers, aside from the specialists, know much about it. Moreover, unlike most areas of legal specialization, such as tax, labor, and anti-trust law, the basic principles of which are known to most general practitioners, if a generalist knows anything about literary or industrial property, it is apt to be wrong. Furthermore, because clients tend to approach generalists first, substantial and incurable injury may result from a generalist's mistaken …
Gottschalk V. Benson, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Gottschalk V. Benson, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
State Law Of Patent Exploitation, Edward H. Cooper
State Law Of Patent Exploitation, Edward H. Cooper
Articles
The main purpose of the present inquiry is to determine whether second thoughts support or undermine the instinctive supposition that the doctrines surrounding cooperative use of patents should be federal. The original creator of a patented invention is seldom in a position to exploit its commercial potential alone; even if the invention is created by the employee of a vast enterprise, it is almost inevitable that the patent will be assigned to his employer. Patent licensing plays a vitally important role in the development of many inventions. The contract doctrines surrounding such transactions, and various other consensual undertakings relating to …