Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Consequences For Patent Owners If A Patent Is Unconstitutionally Invalidated By The Patent Trial And Appeal Board, Mark Magas

Chicago-Kent Law Review

There have been many constitutional challenges against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) since it was created by the America Invents Act in 2011. While the merits of these challenges have been widely debated, there has been little analysis of what would happen if one of these challenges succeeded and patents are found to have been unconstitutionally invalidated. This note examines how issues with waiver, retroactivity, and finality may prevent patent owners from getting their patent rights back, considering the type of constitutional challenge and the different stages of the PTAB process. While the odds are stacked against patent …

State Immunity And The Patent Trial And Appeal Board, Tejas N. Narechania

Tejas N. Narechania

State Immunity Doctrine: Demoting The Patent System, Charles C. Wong

Maine Law Review

Congress enacted the Patent Remedy Clarification Act (PRCA) in 1992, which authorized patent holders to sue a state for patent infringement in federal court. The PRCA clearly expressed Congress's intent to abrogate Eleventh Amendment state sovereign immunity as required by Atascadero State Hospital v. Scanlon. In 1996, Seminole Tribe v. Florida changed the landscape of congressional power to abrogate state immunity by declaring Congress may do so only if acting pursuant to its powers under section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. In his dissent, Justice Stevens forecasted that the Seminole Tribe decision would effectively leave patent holders injured by an …

Private Or Public Right? Who Should Adjudicate Patentability Disputes And Is The Current Scheme Really Constitutional?, Jasmyne M. Baynard

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

“The patent bargain is the foundation upon which the patent system is built: in exchange for protections for an invention, the inventor agrees to make public their inventions so that others may build upon it.” The patent bargain creates a presumption of protection for the inventors, yet categorizing the patent a public right or a private right has diminished expectations for inventors and confusion for the masses. On October 11, 2016, the Supreme Court denied two petitions for writ of certiorari that challenged the constitutionality of Patent Trial and Review Board proceedings on the basis of the patent owner’s Seventh …

Losing The Forest Among The Trees In The Festo Saga-Rationalizing The Doctrine Of Equivalents And Prosecution History Estoppel In View Of The Historical Justifications For Patent Protection, Ryan Thomas Grace

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

To Promote The Progress Of Science And Useful Arts: The Background And Origin Of The Intellectual Property Clause Of The United States Constitution, Edward C. Walterscheid

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Are The Secrecy Order Compensation Provisions Of The Patent Act Constitutional Under The Fifth Amendment?, Adam J. Citrin

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

The secrecy order provisions of the Patent Act' raise a number of issues under the U.S. Constitution. The primary focus of this note is on the Fifth Amendment issues raised by the Invention Secrecy Act.

Policy Tailors And The Rookie Regulator, Sarah Tran

Sarah Tran

Commentators have long lamented the lack of policy tailoring in the patent system. But unlike other administrative agencies, who regularly tailor regulatory policies to the needs of specific industries, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) was widely believed to lack the authority and institutional competence for such policymaking. This Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of recent legislative reforms to the PTO’s policymaking authority. It shows the reforms empower the PTO to have a larger say in patent policy than ever before. The big question is thus: to what extent is it good policy for a rookie regulator to …

Why Copyright Law Lacks Taste And Scents, Leon R. Calleja

Leon R Calleja

This paper explores the resistance in U.S. copyright law to extend copyright protection to scents and tastes, and advances the position that copyright law’s originality and expression requirements limit copyrightable subject matter to expressions that engage both author and audience in a way that requires reflection upon the work—or at least, the capacity for reflection—in a necessarily intersubjective and communicative fashion, what I call a “public dimension.” That the sensations of taste and smell are inescapably immediate and private suggest that they lack the kind of public dimension that visual and audio works exhibit. Indeed, this creates an ineffability characterized …

Valuing Publication And Attribution In Intellectual Property, Christopher Sprigman, Christopher Buccafusco, Zachary Burns

Christopher Sprigman

This is the third in a series of articles focusing on the experimental economics of intellectual property. In earlier work, we have experimentally studied the ways in which creators assign monetary value to the things that they create. That research has suggested that creators are subject to a systematic bias that leads them to overvalue their work. This bias, which we have called the 'creativity effect,' potentially results in inefficient markets in IP, because creators may be unwilling to license their works for rational amounts. Our prior research, however, like American IP law itself, focused exclusively on the monetary value …

The Creativity Effect, Christopher Sprigman, Christopher Buccafusco

Christopher Sprigman

This paper reports the first experiment to demonstrate the existence of a valuation anomaly associated with the creation of new works. To date, a wealth of social science research has shown that substantial valuation asymmetries exist between owners of goods and potential purchasers of them. The least amount of money that owners are willing to accept to part with their possessions is often far greater than the amount that purchasers would be willing to pay to obtain them. This phenomenon, known as the endowment effect, may create substantial inefficiencies in many markets. Our experiment demonstrates the existence of a related …

An Offensive Weapon?: An Empirical Analysis Of The 'Sword' Of State Sovereign Immunity In State-Owned Patents, Tejas N. Narechania

Tejas N. Narechania

Brief Of Eleven Law Professors And Aarp As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Bilski V. Kappos, 130 S. Ct. 3218 (2010) (No. 08-964), Joshua Sarnoff, Lori Andrews, Andrew Chin, Ralph Clifford, Christine Farley, Sean Flynn, Debra Greenfield, Peter Jaszi, Charles Mcmanis, Lateef Mtima, Malla Pollack

Amicus Briefs

This is the brief filed by Joshua Sarnoff and Barbara Jones on behalf of various law professors and AARP in the Bilski v. Kappos case, discussing constitutional limits to the Patent power.

Self-Realizing Inventions And The Utilitarian Foundation Of Patent Law, Alan J. Devlin, Neel U. Sukhatme

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Unlike other forms of intellectual property, patents are universally justified on utilitarian grounds alone. Valuable inventions and discoveries, bearing the characteristics of public goods, are easily appropriated by third parties. Because much technological innovation occurs pursuant to significant expenditures—both in terms of upfront research and subsequent commercialization costs—inventors must be permitted to extract at least part of the social gain associated with their technological contributions. Absent some form of proprietary control or alternative reward system, economics predicts that suboptimal capital will be devoted to the innovative process.

This widely accepted principle comes with an important corollary: namely, that canons of …

Does The Supreme Court Still Matter?, Timothy B. Dyk

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Thinking Outside The Pandora's Box: Why The Dmca Is Unconstitutional Under Article I §8 Of The U.S. Constitution, Joshua L. Schwartz

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Simultaneous Copyright And Trade Secret Claims: Can The Copyright Misuse Defense Prevent Constitutional Doublethink?, Ralph D. Clifford

Faculty Publications

As the Constitution authorizes Congress to grant copyrights, it subjects the power to a public purpose requirement. Any monopoly Congress grants must be for the purpose of “promot[ing] the progress of science and useful arts.” But one result of Congress enacting the 1976 Act is a potential conflict between the Act and this public purpose requirement. An owner of intellectual property may believe that both copyright law – which mandates disclosure – and trade secret law – which mandates secrecy – can be used simultaneously. To believe that disclosure and secrecy can coexist is doublethink as both cannot be true. …