Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Unilateral Refusals To Deal In Intellectual Property After Image Techical Services, Inc. V. Eastman Kodak Co., Brian F. Ladenburg
Unilateral Refusals To Deal In Intellectual Property After Image Techical Services, Inc. V. Eastman Kodak Co., Brian F. Ladenburg
Washington Law Review
While the Federal Patent and Copyright Acts give patent and copyright holders limited exclusive rights in intellectual property, the Sherman Act prohibits combinations or conspiracies that restrain trade and monopolization. Although firms possessing intellectual property generally exercise their statutory exclusionary rights without running afoul of the antitrust laws, conduct may plausibly be authorized by intellectual property law but forbidden by antitrust. In construing the two statutory schemes, federal courts have generally held that conduct authorized by the intellectual property laws, in the absence of some further inculpatory action, cannot form the basis for antitrust liability. The Ninth Circuit departed from …
In The Wake Of Lough V. Brunswick Corp.: Who Decides Experimental Purpose In 35 U.S.C. § 102(B) Public Use Cases?, Chad P. Webster
In The Wake Of Lough V. Brunswick Corp.: Who Decides Experimental Purpose In 35 U.S.C. § 102(B) Public Use Cases?, Chad P. Webster
Washington Law Review
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), a defendant can avoid liability for patent infringement if the patented invention was in public use in the United States more than one year prior to the date of patent application. Although "public use" is broadly construed to include most nonsecret uses, a nonsecret use pursued primarily for bona fide experimental purposes is merely an "experimental use." Experimental use negates the conclusion that an invention was in public use within the meaning of section 102(b). In Lough v. Brunswick Corp., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the issues …
Harmonizing The Japanese Patent Sytem With Its U.S. Counterpart Through Judge-Made Law: Interaction Between Japanese And U.S. Case Law Developments, Toshiko Takenaka
Harmonizing The Japanese Patent Sytem With Its U.S. Counterpart Through Judge-Made Law: Interaction Between Japanese And U.S. Case Law Developments, Toshiko Takenaka
Washington International Law Journal
Japanese jurisprudence has been strongly influenced by German jurisprudence, but this trend is changing because more legal professionals including judges, patent attorneys and patent office examiners study at U.S. Law Schools. Some recent Japanese court decisions reflect this strong influence from U.S. jurisprudence. Particularly, the influence is significant in the field of patent claim interpretation, courts' power to review the validity, parallel importation and patent infringement damages. This article concludes that there are few significant differences remaining between the U.S. and Japanese patent laws, and Japanese courts' eagerness to adopt U.S patent law significantly contributes to harmonizing the remaining differences.
Determining The Scope Of A Copyright Owner's Right To Bar Imports: L'Anza Research International, Inc. V. Quality King Distributors, Maureen M. Cyr
Determining The Scope Of A Copyright Owner's Right To Bar Imports: L'Anza Research International, Inc. V. Quality King Distributors, Maureen M. Cyr
Washington Law Review
In L'Anza Research International, Inc. v. Quality King Distributors, the Ninth Circuit held that a copyright owner's right to bar imports is not limited by the first sale doctrine, which ordinarily prohibits a copyright owner from controlling the further distribution of copies after the copyright owner has consented to their sale. This Note examines the importation right in light of the purposes of the Copyright Act's distribution and first sale provisions, congressional intent behind the importation right, and the underlying purposes of copyright law. The Note argues that the first sale doctrine properly limits a copyright owner's right to …