Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2009

PDF

Intellectual property

Discipline
Institution
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 1 - 30 of 129

Full-Text Articles in Law

Beyond Trademark Use, Stacey Dogan Dec 2009

Beyond Trademark Use, Stacey Dogan

Faculty Scholarship

For several years now, the question of “trademark use” has taken center stage in the debate over trademark liability of online intermediaries. Doctrinally, the debate addresses whether the Lanham Act places any limit on the types of “use” of trademarks that can subject one to a claim of infringement. The real conflict, however, has occurred at the normative level: whatever the Lanham Act says or does not say about trademark use, should trademark law limit the definition of infringement to situations in which the defendant has used the mark to brand its own products?

The Second Circuit appears to have ...


The Evolution Of Copyright Law In The Arts, Kevin Liftig Dec 2009

The Evolution Of Copyright Law In The Arts, Kevin Liftig

Honors Scholar Theses

As digital storage of intellectual goods such as literature and music has become widespread, the duplication and unlicensed distribution of these goods has become a frequent source of legal contention. When technology for production and replication of intellectual goods advanced, there were disputes concerning the rights to produce and duplicate these works. As new technologies have made copies of intellectual goods more accessible, legal institutions have largely moved to protect the rights of ownership of ideas through copyright laws. This paper will examine key changes in the technology that affect intellectual property, and the responses that legal institutions have made ...


The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement: An Updated Analysis, Kimberlee G. Weatherall Nov 2009

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement: An Updated Analysis, Kimberlee G. Weatherall

Kimberlee G Weatherall

This paper provides an updated analysis of the issues posed by negotiations for the ACTA, as at November 2009.


Rational Design Rights Ignorance, David Orozco Nov 2009

Rational Design Rights Ignorance, David Orozco

David Orozco

No abstract provided.


Misuse Of Reasonable Royalty Damages As A Patent Infringement Deterrent, The, Brian J. Love Nov 2009

Misuse Of Reasonable Royalty Damages As A Patent Infringement Deterrent, The, Brian J. Love

Missouri Law Review

This Article studies the Federal Circuit's use of excessive reasonable royalty awards as a patent infringement deterrent. I argue against this practice, explaining that, properly viewed in context of the patent system as a whole, distorting the reasonable royalty measure of damages is an unnecessary and ineffective means of ensuring an optimal level of reward for inventors and deterrence for infringers. First, I introduce cases in which the Federal Circuit and other courts following its lead have awarded punitive reasonable royalty awards and explain the Federal Circuit's professed rationale for doing so. Next, I demonstrate that this practice ...


How (Not) To Discourage The Unscrupulous Copyist, Peter L. Ludwig Oct 2009

How (Not) To Discourage The Unscrupulous Copyist, Peter L. Ludwig

Peter L. Ludwig

This short article explores how the U.S. and Japanese courts implement the doctrine of equivalence when determining patent infringement. The doctrine of equivalence is a balance of, on one hand, the public’s interest to know the metes and bounds of the patent; and on the other hand, the private interest of the patentee to be granted a sufficient scope for the granted patent. After comparing and contrasting the courts’ implementation of the doctrine, I propose a new method that places the burden on the patent practitioner, before infringement proceedings begin, to determine the proper scope of the patent.


Acts Of Parliament: Privatisation, Promulgation And Crown Copyright – Is There A Need For A Royal Royalty?, Mark Perry Oct 2009

Acts Of Parliament: Privatisation, Promulgation And Crown Copyright – Is There A Need For A Royal Royalty?, Mark Perry

Mark Perry

The road of privatisation of government assets is littered with the debris of mishaps and oversights. One clear illustration is the history and effect of the sale of the Government Printing Office (GPO) in 1990. Within the sale process there was a failure to ensure adequate consideration of the policy implications from an important perspective, namely the effect of privatising the means of promulgation of the normative materials of the State. Furthermore, there was no enquiry into the dubious assumptions made as to Crown Copyright in legislation. Intellectual property rights in primary legal materials create a dilemma for policy makers ...


Open Access Week (Retention Of Author Rights), Mark Perry Oct 2009

Open Access Week (Retention Of Author Rights), Mark Perry

Law Presentations

No abstract provided.


Repackaging, Pharmaceuticals, And The European Union: Managing Gray Markets In An Uncertain Legal Environment, Robert Bird Oct 2009

Repackaging, Pharmaceuticals, And The European Union: Managing Gray Markets In An Uncertain Legal Environment, Robert Bird

Robert C Bird

One of the most robust gray markets in the world is the parallel importation of pharmaceutical drugs in the European Union (EU). Drug manufacturers have tried to stop parallel importation with over thirty years of litigation. The result has applied. This manuscript examines the forces underlying the EU gray market for drugs, discusses how trademark law and not patent law has become the primary basis for legal challenges, and offers strategies for manufacturers to impede importers in a truly chaotic legal environment.


Copyright Or Trademark? Can One Boy Wizard Prevent Film Title Duplication?, Anna Phillips Oct 2009

Copyright Or Trademark? Can One Boy Wizard Prevent Film Title Duplication?, Anna Phillips

San Diego International Law Journal

This Comment will examine the various approaches that India, the United Kingdom, and the United States take in dealing with film title disputes. Second, this Comment will discuss a case brought by Warner Brothers regrding a Harry Potter film title dispute in India and how the outcome of the case affects title infringement issues... Finally, this Comment will discuss a possible loophole in current trademark regulations regarding film titles that will support the argument that countries should use both copyright and trademark law to minimize the release of film titles that are similar or identical to those already on the ...


Success, Dominance, And Interoperability, Alan Devlin, Michael Jacobs, Bruno Peixoto Oct 2009

Success, Dominance, And Interoperability, Alan Devlin, Michael Jacobs, Bruno Peixoto

Indiana Law Journal

In September 2007, the European Court of First Instance (CFI) ruled that Microsoft violated the European Union's competition law by failing to provide certain of its rivals with proprietary computer protocols that would have enabled them to make their products fully "interoperable" with Microsoft's dominant operating system. In the process, the court suggested that an owner of certain kinds of dominant intellectual property is obliged to share its property with rivals to the extent necessary to allow those rivals to compete "viably" with the dominant firm. Thus, in theory, should protocol sharing fail to achieve the requisite degree ...


Stifling Or Stimulating - The Role Of Gene Patents In Research And Genetic Testing, Lawrence M. Sung Sep 2009

Stifling Or Stimulating - The Role Of Gene Patents In Research And Genetic Testing, Lawrence M. Sung

Lawrence M. Sung

No abstract provided.


Intellectual Property Protection Or Protectionism? Declaratory Judgment Use By Patent Owners Against Prospective Infringers, Lawrence M. Sung Sep 2009

Intellectual Property Protection Or Protectionism? Declaratory Judgment Use By Patent Owners Against Prospective Infringers, Lawrence M. Sung

Lawrence M. Sung

No abstract provided.


Collegiality And Collaboration In The Age Of Exclusivity, Lawrence M. Sung Sep 2009

Collegiality And Collaboration In The Age Of Exclusivity, Lawrence M. Sung

Lawrence M. Sung

No abstract provided.


The End Of The (Virtual) World, Joshua A.T. Fairfield Sep 2009

The End Of The (Virtual) World, Joshua A.T. Fairfield

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.


Facebook 2 Blackberry And Database Trading Systems: Morphing Social Networking To Business Growth In A Global Recession, Roger M. Groves Sep 2009

Facebook 2 Blackberry And Database Trading Systems: Morphing Social Networking To Business Growth In A Global Recession, Roger M. Groves

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.


Ip And Antitrust: Errands Into The Wilderness, Herbert Hovenkamp Aug 2009

Ip And Antitrust: Errands Into The Wilderness, Herbert Hovenkamp

Herbert Hovenkamp

IP AND ANTITRUST: ERRANDS INTO THE WILDERNESS

ABSTRACT

Antitrust and intellectual property law both seek to promote economic welfare by facilitating competition and investment in innovation. At various times both antitrust and IP law have wandered off this course and have become more driven by special interests. Today, antitrust and IP are on very different roads to reform. Antitrust began an Errand into the Wilderness in the late 1970s with a series of Supreme Court decisions that linked the plaintiff’s harm and right to obtain a remedy to the competition-furthering goals of antitrust policy. Today, patent law has begun ...


Copyright Infringement And Harmless Speech, Christina Bohannan Aug 2009

Copyright Infringement And Harmless Speech, Christina Bohannan

Christina Bohannan

Copyright law is a glaring and unjustified exception to the rule that the government may not prohibit speech without a showing that it causes harm. While the First Amendment sometimes protects even harmful speech, it virtually never allows the prohibition of harmless speech. Yet, while other speech-burdening laws, such as defamation and right of publicity laws, require demonstrable evidence that the defendant’s speech causes actual harm, copyright law does not make harm a requirement of infringement. Although copyright law considers harm to the market for the copyrighted work as a factor in fair use analysis, harm is not always ...


Why Typefaces Proliferate Without Copyright Protection, Blake Fry Aug 2009

Why Typefaces Proliferate Without Copyright Protection, Blake Fry

Blake Fry

Classic economic theory predicts that without copyright protection authors and publishers would not have sufficient incentive to invest the time or money needed to produce or distribute new works, and the public would suffer a shortage. Copyrights are an attempt to solve this problem. By granting a monopoly to the author of an expressive work the government gives him the sole right to copy it. If only the author has this right, authors will get a reasonable rate of return, and thus a sufficient incentive to create new works. However, empirical evidence on whether adequate expressive works would be created ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson Aug 2009

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, James Gibson

James Gibson

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property's putative ...


Reconciling Fair Use And Trademark Use, Margreth Barrett Aug 2009

Reconciling Fair Use And Trademark Use, Margreth Barrett

Margreth Barrett

This article looks to early common law, the legislative history of the Lanham Act, and public policy considerations to evaluate the relationship of the Lanham Act’s trademark use requirement to the trademark fair use defense. Although a number of commentators have suggested the contrary, I conclude that requiring infringement plaintiffs to demonstrate the defendant’s “trademark use” as part of its case-in-chief is consistent with the fair use defense, which waives liability if the defendant can demonstrate that its use was “in good faith” and “otherwise than as a trademark” only to describe its goods or services. These two ...