Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Will Delaware Be Different? An Empirical Study Of Tc Heartland And The Shift To Defendant Choice Of Venue, Ofer Eldar, Neel U. Sukhatme
Will Delaware Be Different? An Empirical Study Of Tc Heartland And The Shift To Defendant Choice Of Venue, Ofer Eldar, Neel U. Sukhatme
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Why do some venues evolve into litigation havens while others do not? Venues might compete for litigation for various reasons, like enhancing their judges’ prestige and increasing revenues for the local bar. This competition is framed by the party that chooses the venue. Whether plaintiffs or defendants primarily choose venue is crucial because, we argue, the two scenarios are not symmetrical.
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods LLC illustrates this dynamic. There, the Court effectively shifted venue choice in many patent infringement cases from plaintiffs to corporate defendants. We use TC Heartland to empirically …
Evaluating Market Reactions To Non-Practicing Entity Litigation, Emiliano Giudici, Justin Blount
Evaluating Market Reactions To Non-Practicing Entity Litigation, Emiliano Giudici, Justin Blount
Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law
An ongoing debate in patent law involves the role "non-practicing entities," sometimes called "patent trolls," serve in the patent system. Some argue they serve as valuable market intermediaries, while others contend they are a drain on innovation and an impediment to a well-functioning patent system. This Article adds to the data available in this debate by conducting an event study that analyzes the market reaction to patent litigation filed by large "mass aggregator" non-practicing entities against large publicly traded companies. This study advances the literature by attempting to reproduce the results of previous event studies done in this area with …
Patent Privateers And Antitrust Fears, Matthew Sipe
Patent Privateers And Antitrust Fears, Matthew Sipe
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Patent trolls are categorically demonized as threatening American innovation and industry. But whether they are a threat that antitrust law is equipped to deal with is a complex question that depends on the particular type of patent troll and activities they engage in. This Article looks specifically at privateer patent trolls: entities that acquire their patents from operating entities and assert them against other industry members. In the particular context of privateering, antitrust law is almost certainly not the proper legal solution. Privateering does raise significant issues: circumventing litigation constraints, evading licensing obligations, and raising the cost and frequency of …
Rent-Seeking And Inter Partes Review: An Analysis Of Invalidity Assertion Entities In Patent Law, W. Michael Schuster
Rent-Seeking And Inter Partes Review: An Analysis Of Invalidity Assertion Entities In Patent Law, W. Michael Schuster
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
This Essay is the first analysis of a recent entrant on the patent landscape: the Invalidity Assertion Entity (IAE). IAEs engage in rent-seeking by demanding payment from patent holders in exchange for not attempting to invalidate their patents through administrative action before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The response to IAEs has been uniformly negative. Reflexive proposals have been raised in Congress (unsurprisingly) to terminate the IAE business model. In contrast to the common response to IAEs, this Essay discusses how profit-driven IAEs may generate socially beneficial externalities and why legislating to end the IAE business model is imprudent.
Holding Up And Holding Out, Colleen V. Chien
Holding Up And Holding Out, Colleen V. Chien
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Patent “hold-up” and patent “hold-out” present important, alternative theories for what ails the patent system. Patent “hold-up” occurs when a patent owner sues a company when it is most vulnerable—after it has implemented a technology—and is able wrest a settlement because it is too late for the company to change course. Patent “hold-out” is the practice of companies routinely ignoring patents and resisting patent owner demands because the odds of getting caught are small. Hold-up has arguably predicted the current patent crises, and the ex ante assertion of technology patents whether in the smartphone war, standards, or patent “troll” context. …
The Economics Of Third-Party Financed Litigation, Keith N. Hylton
The Economics Of Third-Party Financed Litigation, Keith N. Hylton
Faculty Scholarship
This paper examines the law and economics of third-party financed litigation. I explore the conditions under which a system of third-party financiers and litigators can enhance social welfare, and the conditions under which it is likely to reduce social welfare. Among the applications I consider are the sale of legal rights (such as contingent tort claims) to insurers, to patent trolls, and to financiers generally
Res Or Rules - Patents And The (Uncertain) Rules Of The Game, Emily Michiko Morris
Res Or Rules - Patents And The (Uncertain) Rules Of The Game, Emily Michiko Morris
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The Article proceeds as follows. Part I reviews the basics of patent claiming, the traditional view of claims as real property deeds, and why uncertainty as to the boundaries of those deeds is considered undesirable. Part II critiques the analogy between real property deeds and patent claims, highlighting in particular the requisite novelty and conceptual nature of the patent res, the differences between the purposes of the patent system and real property regimes, and the effect of these different purposes on the expected predictability of patent boundaries. Part III then changes the analogy from patent claims as property deeds to …
Should Patent Infringement Require Proof Of Copying?, Mark A. Lemley
Should Patent Infringement Require Proof Of Copying?, Mark A. Lemley
Michigan Law Review
Patent infringement is a strict liability offense. Patent law gives patent owners not just the right to prevent others from copying their ideas, but the power to control the use of their idea--even by those who independently develop a technology with no knowledge of the patent or the patentee. This is a power that exists nowhere else in intellectual property (IP) or real property law, but it is a one that patentees have had, with rare exceptions, since the inception of the Republic. In an important paper in the Michigan Law Review, Samson Vermont seeks to change this, arguing …
The Angel Is In The Big Picture: A Response To Lemley, Samson Vermont
The Angel Is In The Big Picture: A Response To Lemley, Samson Vermont
Michigan Law Review
An invention within close reach of multiple inventors differs from an invention within distant reach of a lone inventor. The differences between these two archetypes of invention -"reinventables" and "singletons"- remain unexploited under current U.S. law. Should we reform the law to exploit the differences? Mark Lemley and I agree that we should. To date, those economists who have closely examined the issue concur. What are the differences between reinventables and singletons? First, reinventables can be brought into existence with incentives of lower magnitude. This suggests that we can obtain reinventables at a lower price than we currently pay-i.e., with …