Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Using Signal Theory To Determine Nonobviousness Of Inventions, Michael O'Brien, Idonah Molina
Using Signal Theory To Determine Nonobviousness Of Inventions, Michael O'Brien, Idonah Molina
Journal of Intellectual Property Law
No abstract provided.
Which Supreme Court Cases Influenced Recent Supreme Court Ip Decisions? A Citation Study, Joseph S. Miller
Which Supreme Court Cases Influenced Recent Supreme Court Ip Decisions? A Citation Study, Joseph S. Miller
Scholarly Works
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided an increasing number of intellectual property cases — especially patent cases — over the last several terms. Which prior cases influence the stated reasoning in these recent Supreme Court IP cases? A handful of citation studies of supreme courts in the U.S., both state and federal, conducted over the last 40 years suggest that the Court would most often cite its own prior cases; that it would cite its more recent cases more often than its older cases; and that a small number of its prior cases would receive a large share of the …
Droit De Suite, Copyright’S First Sale Doctrine And Preemption Of State Law, David E. Shipley
Droit De Suite, Copyright’S First Sale Doctrine And Preemption Of State Law, David E. Shipley
Scholarly Works
The primary focus of this article is whether California’s forty-year old droit de suite statute; the California Resale Royalty Act (CRRA), is subject to federal preemption under the Copyright Act. This issue is now being litigated in the Ninth Circuit, and this article concludes that the CRRA is preempted under section 301(a) of the Copyright Act and under the Supremacy Clause because it at odds with copyright’s well-established first sale doctrine.
The basic idea of droit de suite is that each time an artist’s work is resold by a dealer or auction house, the artist is entitled to a royalty, …
Reasonable Certainty & Corpus Linguistics: Judging Definiteness After Nautilus & Teva, Joseph S. Miller
Reasonable Certainty & Corpus Linguistics: Judging Definiteness After Nautilus & Teva, Joseph S. Miller
Scholarly Works
In Nautilus (2014), the Supreme Court held “that a patent is invalid for indefiniteness if its claims...fail to inform, with reasonable certainty, those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention.” We don’t require perfect clarity because, as Festo (2002) highlights, patentees can’t achieve it. We don’t launch a post hoc judicial salvage operation to rescue slipshod text because, as the functional-claiming cases from the 1930s and 1940s highlight, others can’t adequately plan around it. Reasonably certain notice, then, is just right: § 112 “require[s] that a patent’s claims, viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, …