Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Originality's Other Path, Joseph Fishman
Originality's Other Path, Joseph Fishman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Drawing on original archival research, this Article challenges the standard account of what originality doctrine is and what courts can do with it. It identifies Nelson's forgotten copyright legacy: a still-growing line of cases that treats music differently, sometimes even more analogously to patentable inventions than to other authorial works. These decisions seem to function as a hidden enclave within originality's larger domain, playing by rules that others couldn't get away with. They form originality's other path, much less trod than the familiar one but with a doctrinal story of its own to tell. Originality and nonobviousness's parallel beginnings reveal …
The Patent Option, Daniel J. Gervais
The Patent Option, Daniel J. Gervais
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
There is a shift in the shape of intellectual property (IP) tools used to strengthen and lengthen the right of pharmaceutical companies to exclude others from making and marketing their products. Patents have traditionally been the tool of choice. Over the past two decades, however, pharmaceutical companies have increased their degree of reliance on a right known as “data exclusivity.” This right, which now exists in most major jurisdictions, is the right to prevent third parties from relying on the clinical trial data submitted by another pharmaceutical company to obtain marketing approval for a bioequivalent or biosimilar product. The right …
Patenting The Unexplained, Sean B. Seymore
Patenting The Unexplained, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
It is a bedrock principle of patent law that an inventor need not understand how or why an invention works. The patent statute simply requires that the inventor explain how to make and use the invention. But explaining how to make and use something without understanding how or why it works yields patents with uninformative disclosures. Their teaching function is limited; one who wants to understand or figure out the underlying scientific principles must turn elsewhere. This limited disclosure rule does not align with the norms of science and tends to make patent documents a less robust form of technical …
Exploring The Interfaces Between Big Data And Intellectual Property Law, Daniel J. Gervais
Exploring The Interfaces Between Big Data And Intellectual Property Law, Daniel J. Gervais
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This article reviews the application of several IP rights (copyright, patent, sui generis database right, data exclusivity and trade secret) to Big Data. Beyond the protection of software used to collect and process Big Data corpora, copyright’s traditional role is challenged by the relatively unstructured nature of the non-relational (noSQL) databases typical of Big Data corpora. This also impacts the application of the EU sui generis right in databases. Misappropriation (tort-based) or anti-parasitic behaviour protection might apply, where available, to data generated by AI systems that has high but short-lived value. Copyright in material contained in Big Data corpora must …
Music As A Matter Of Law, Joseph P. Fishman
Music As A Matter Of Law, Joseph P. Fishman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
What is a musical work? Philosophers debate it, but for judges the answer has long been simple: music means melody. Though few recognize it today, that answer goes all the way back to the birth of music copyright litigation in the nineteenth century. Courts adopted the era’s dominant aesthetic view identifying melody as the site of originality and, consequently, the litmus test for similarity. Surprisingly, music’s single-element test has persisted as an anomaly within the modern copyright system, where typically multiple features of eligible subject matter are eligible for protection. Yet things are now changing. Recent judicial decisions are beginning …
Patenting Around Failure, Sean B. Seymore
Patenting Around Failure, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Many patents cover inventions that do not work as described. Fingers often point to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Patent Office), which is criticized for doing a poor job of examining patents. But the story is more complicated for at least three reasons. First, from an information standpoint, the Patent Office is at a clear disadvantage because the inventor has little incentive to disclose failure because it might compromise patentability. Second, an inventor is not required to actually make everything that is claimed (or verify that everything that is claimed actually works) before filing a patent application. Third, inventors …
Reinvention, Sean B. Seymore
Reinvention, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
It is axiomatic that once an invention has been patented, it cannot be patented again. This aligns with the quid pro quo theory of patents — the public would receive nothing new in exchange for the second patent. Enforcing this rule is done through the novelty requirement, which bars a patent if the invention is already known. But the rule is hard to justify if the original patentee reneged on the quid pro quo by inadequately disclosing how to make and use the invention. The inadequate disclosure suggests that the original inventor did not invent anything and the public received …
Creating Around Copyright, Joseph P. Fishman
Creating Around Copyright, Joseph P. Fishman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
It is generally understood that the copyright system constrains downstream creators by limiting their ability to use protected works in follow-on expression. Those who view the promotion of creativity as copyright’s mission usually consider this constraint to be a necessary evil at best and an unnecessary one at worst. This conventional wisdom rests on the seemingly intuitive premise that more creative choice will deliver more creativity. Yet that premise is belied by both the history of the arts and contemporary psychological research on the creative process. In fact, creativity flourishes best not under complete freedom, but rather under a moderate …
Atypical Inventions, Sean B. Seymore
Atypical Inventions, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Patent law is constantly evolving to accommodate advances in science and technology. But, for a variety of reasons, some aspects of patent doctrine have not evolved over time leading to a growing disconnect between the patent system and certain technical communities. Particularly vulnerable to the ill effects of this disconnect are "atypical" inventions, which this Article definesas those in which either (1) a technical aspect of the invention or the inventive process does not conform to an established legal standard in patent law or (2) the technical underpinnings of the invention depart from well-established scientific paradigms. An example of the …
Heightened Enablement In The Unpredictable Arts, Sean B. Seymore
Heightened Enablement In The Unpredictable Arts, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
A bedrock principle of patent law is that an applicant must sufficiently disclose the invention in exchange for the right to exclude. The essential facet of the disclosure requirement is enablement, which compels a patent applicant to enable a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) how to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without undue experimentation. Enablement problems may arise when the applicant claims an invention broadly with a dearth of supporting data or examples. This is problematic in unpredictable fields like chemistry because a PHOSITA often needs a specific and detailed teaching in …
My Patent, Your Patent, Or Our Patent? Inventorship Disputes Within Academic Research Groups, Sean B. Seymore
My Patent, Your Patent, Or Our Patent? Inventorship Disputes Within Academic Research Groups, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The statutory requirement of identifying the first and true inventor is often muddled by the mores and practices of academic science. Unfortunately, and despite claims of scientists and attorneys to the contrary, I contend that the inventive entity is not discovered but rather determined in and through social relationships. Although universities should always strive to promulgate policies which fully comport with the law, the biggest incentive for universities to insist on correct inventorship is financial. I argue that the rise in mentee claims for sole or joint inventorship, as well as the ever-present threat of an inequitable conduct defense in …