Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Intellectual Property Law (30)
- Internet Law (6)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (3)
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (3)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (2)
-
- Computer Law (2)
- Conflict of Laws (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Food and Drug Law (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Legal History (2)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (2)
- Science and Technology Law (2)
- Agriculture Law (1)
- Consumer Protection Law (1)
- Economics (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- International Law (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Law and Gender (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Publication
-
- Ulf Maunsbach (5)
- Herbert Hovenkamp (4)
- Francina Cantatore (2)
- J. Jonas Anderson (2)
- Srividhya Ragavan (2)
-
- Constance E. Bagley (1)
- Dana Beldiman (1)
- Daniel J Gervais (1)
- Eugene V Beliy (1)
- George R Holton (1)
- Harmony N. Oswald (1)
- Javier André Murillo Chávez (1)
- Joshua Jeng (1)
- Megan M Carpenter (1)
- Methaya Sirichit (1)
- Peter Lee (1)
- Ping-Hsun Chen (1)
- Samuel F Ernst (1)
- Shlomit Yanisky-Ravid Professor of Law (1)
- Stephen M. Maurer (1)
- Tom W. Bell (1)
- Xi Chen (1)
Articles 31 - 32 of 32
Full-Text Articles in Law
Trolls Or Toll-Takers: Do Intellectual Property Non-Practicing Entities Add Value To Society?, Samuel F. Ernst
Trolls Or Toll-Takers: Do Intellectual Property Non-Practicing Entities Add Value To Society?, Samuel F. Ernst
Samuel F Ernst
There are few areas of patent law more contentious than the dispute over the social utility of “non-practicing entities,” or (if you will excuse the expression) “patent trolls.” Whether non-practicing entities add value to society is a topic of much debate, and the focus of the 2015 Chapman Law Review Symposium.
Restoring The Fact/Law Distinction In Patent Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson
Restoring The Fact/Law Distinction In Patent Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson
J. Jonas Anderson
INTRODUCTION: Two decades ago, the Supreme Court sought to promote more effective, transparent patent litigation in Markman v. Westview Instruments1 by ruling that "the construction of a patent, including terms of art within its claim, is exclusively within the province of the court."'2 In so doing, the Court removed interpretation of patent claims from the black box of jury deliberations by holding that the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial did not extend to patent claim construction. Failing to find clear historical evidence of how claim construction was handled in 179 1,' the Court turned to "the relative interpretive …