Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (190)
- University of Michigan Law School (65)
- UIC School of Law (31)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (24)
- American University Washington College of Law (17)
-
- University of Richmond (12)
- Boston University School of Law (11)
- Notre Dame Law School (11)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (11)
- BLR (10)
- Duke Law (9)
- University of Georgia School of Law (9)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (7)
- Brooklyn Law School (6)
- Cleveland State University (6)
- Pepperdine University (5)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (5)
- Georgetown University Law Center (4)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (4)
- University of Missouri School of Law (4)
- Emory University School of Law (3)
- Georgia State University College of Law (3)
- Marquette University Law School (3)
- New York Law School (3)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (3)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (3)
- University of Washington School of Law (3)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- National Law School of India University (2)
- Keyword
-
- Patent law (54)
- Federal Circuit (46)
- Courts (30)
- Patent (23)
- Copyright (22)
-
- United States Supreme Court (22)
- Intellectual Property Law (19)
- Patents (19)
- Intellectual property (16)
- Supreme Court (16)
- Copyright infringement (15)
- Infringement (15)
- Copyright law (14)
- Jurisdiction (14)
- Patent infringement (14)
- Judges (13)
- Law (13)
- Technology (13)
- Law reform (12)
- Patent and Trademark Office (11)
- Patentability (11)
- Antitrust (10)
- Regulation (10)
- Lanham Act (9)
- Patent system (9)
- Trademark (9)
- Competition (8)
- Congress (8)
- Inventions (8)
- Constitution (7)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (189)
- Faculty Scholarship (22)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (21)
- Michigan Law Review (19)
- Articles (18)
-
- UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law (17)
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal (12)
- UIC Law Review (12)
- American University Law Review (11)
- Touro Law Review (11)
- ExpressO (10)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (10)
- University of Richmond Law Review (9)
- Court Briefs (8)
- Cardozo Law Review (7)
- Faculty Publications (6)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (5)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (5)
- Utah Law Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (4)
- Faculty Articles (4)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (4)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (4)
- Georgia State University Law Review (3)
- Journal of Business & Technology Law (3)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (3)
- Pepperdine Law Review (3)
- Scholarly Works (3)
- Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law (2)
- Brooklyn Law Review (2)
- Publication Type
Articles 271 - 300 of 505
Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law
The Supreme Court: A Help Or A Hindrance To The Federal Circuit's Mission?, 17 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 298 (2018), Donald Dunner
The Supreme Court: A Help Or A Hindrance To The Federal Circuit's Mission?, 17 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 298 (2018), Donald Dunner
UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law
Before the establishment of the Federal Circuit, the system of patent enforcement was deeply flawed, with the circuit courts then responsible for reviewing district court patent decisions harboring widely varying attitudinal views in the interpretation of the patent law. Suggestions for solving the problem through a single specialized appellate patent court were consistently rejected due to general hostility to specialized courts. The formation of the Federal Circuit in 1982 initially appeared to solve the problem in providing uniform and predictable rules governing the enforcement of patents, an essential aspect of the court’s mission. The Supreme Court did not provide any …
Reining In A 'Renegade' Court: Tc Heartland And The Eastern District Of Texas, Jonas Anderson
Reining In A 'Renegade' Court: Tc Heartland And The Eastern District Of Texas, Jonas Anderson
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, the Supreme Court tightened the venue requirement for patent cases, making it more difficult for a plaintiff to demonstrate that a district court has venue over a defendant. Many commentators, however, view TC Heartland as merely a “reshuffling” of the district courts that receive patent cases. Whereas before the case, a large percentage of patent cases were filed in the Eastern District of Texas, now, after TC Heartland, various other U.S. district courts (principally, the District of Delaware) have experienced an increase in patent infringement filings. Some commentators are unconvinced that this …
Commentary, Improving The Quality And Consistency Of Copyright Infringement Analysis In Music, Kristelia A. García
Commentary, Improving The Quality And Consistency Of Copyright Infringement Analysis In Music, Kristelia A. García
Publications
No abstract provided.
Court Capture, Jonas Anderson
Court Capture, Jonas Anderson
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
Capture — the notion that a federal agency can become controlled by the industry the agency is supposed to be regulating — is a fundamental concern for administrative law scholars. Surprisingly, however, no thorough treatment of how capture theory applies to the federal judiciary has been done. The few scholars who have attempted to apply the insights of capture theory to federal courts have generally concluded that the federal courts are insulated from capture concerns.
This Article challenges the notion that the federal courts cannot be captured. It makes two primary arguments. As an initial matter, this Article makes the …
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
Faculty Scholarship
Why do some venues evolve into litigation havens while others do not? Venues might compete for litigation for various reasons, such as 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 v. Kraft Foods 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 measure …
The "Broadest Reasonable Interpretation" And Applying Issue Preclusion To Administrative Patent Claim Construction, Jonathan I. Tietz
The "Broadest Reasonable Interpretation" And Applying Issue Preclusion To Administrative Patent Claim Construction, Jonathan I. Tietz
Michigan Law Review
Inventions are tangible. Yet patents comprise words, and words are imprecise. Thus, disputes over patents involve a process known as “claim construction,” which formally clarifies the meaning of a patent claim’s words and, therefore, the scope of the underlying property right. Adversarial claim construction commonly occurs in various Article III and Article I settings, such as district courts or the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). When these proceedings ignore each other’s claim constructions, a patent’s scope can become inconsistent and unpredictable. The doctrine of issue preclusion could help with this problem. The Supreme Court recently reemphasized in B & …
Assigning Infringement Claims: Silvers V. Sony Pictures, Heather B. Sanborn
Assigning Infringement Claims: Silvers V. Sony Pictures, Heather B. Sanborn
Maine Law Review
The Copyright Act establishes protection for original, creative works of authorship as a means of providing ex ante incentives for creativity. But how real is that protection? Imagine that you have written a script and managed to have your play produced in a local community theater. A few years later, you find that a major Hollywood studio has taken your script, adapted it slightly, and made it into the next summer blockbuster, raking in millions without ever obtaining a license from you. Of course, you can sue them for infringement. But how much will that litigation cost and what are …
Brief Of Amici Curiae On Behalf Of Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Appellant And In Support Of Reversal, Mark Mckenna, Rebecca Tushnet, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Brief Of Amici Curiae On Behalf Of Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Appellant And In Support Of Reversal, Mark Mckenna, Rebecca Tushnet, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Court Briefs
Oral Argument Not Yet Scheduled
No. 17-7035 (Lead Case), 17-7039
American Society for Testing Materials v. Public.Resources.Org, Inc.
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
From the Summary of Argument
ASTM’s fundamental complaint is about unauthorized use of its intangible content—the standards for which it claims copyright ownership. Dastar unambiguously holds, however, that only confusion regarding the source of physical goods is actionable under the Lanham Act; confusion regarding the authorship of the standards or their authorization is not actionable. ASTM cannot avoid Dastar just because Public Resource creates digital copies of those standards. …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors In Favor Of Judgement As A Matter Of Law, John A. Conway, Mark Mckenna
Brief Of Amici Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors In Favor Of Judgement As A Matter Of Law, John A. Conway, Mark Mckenna
Court Briefs
No. 3:14-cv-01849-K
Zenimax Media Inc. v. Oculus VR, LLC
From the Summary of ArgumentPlaintiff’s false designation of origin and false endorsement claims, such as they are, rest on the assertion that defendants falsely represented themselves as the origin of intellectual property on which the Oculus Rift is based. Those claims are barred by Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003), which holds that only confusion regarding the origin of physical goods is actionable under the Lanham Act.
Substantial Similarity: Kohus Got It Right, Gabriel Godoy-Dalmau
Substantial Similarity: Kohus Got It Right, Gabriel Godoy-Dalmau
Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review
This Note is organized as follows. Part I discusses the historical development of the substantial similarity inquiry and its role in a Plaintiff’s prima facie case of copyright infringement. Part II evaluates more recent developments in the substantial similarity inquiry. Part III argues that the various standards that lower courts have developed are themselves substantially similar to each other. This analysis is in line with the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus. Although largely ignored by the scholarly community, the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus got it right.
The Patently Unexceptional Venue Statute, Paul Gugliuzza, Megan M. La Belle
The Patently Unexceptional Venue Statute, Paul Gugliuzza, Megan M. La Belle
Faculty Scholarship
Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as “exceptionalist,” particularly on issues of procedure. The court’s interpretation of the venue statute for patent infringement suits seems, at first glance, to fit that mold. According to the Federal Circuit, the statute places few constraints on the plaintiff’s choice of forum when suing corporate defendants. This permissive venue rule has lead critics to suggest that the court is, once again, outside the mainstream. The Supreme Court’s recent grant of certiorari in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods would seem to indicate that those critics …
Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: 'Disparaging' Trademarks Meet The First Amendment 02-07-2017, Niki Kuckes
Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: 'Disparaging' Trademarks Meet The First Amendment 02-07-2017, Niki Kuckes
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Private Or Public Right? Who Should Adjudicate Patentability Disputes And Is The Current Scheme Really Constitutional?, Jasmyne M. Baynard
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 …
How Much Has The Supreme Court Changed Patent Law?, Paul Gugliuzza
How Much Has The Supreme Court Changed Patent Law?, Paul Gugliuzza
Faculty Scholarship
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided a remarkable number of patent cases in the past decade, particularly as compared to the first twenty years of the Federal Circuit’s existence. No longer is the Federal Circuit “the de facto Supreme Court of patents,” as Mark Janis wrote in 2001. Rather, it seems the Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of patents. In the article at the center of this symposium, Judge Timothy Dyk of the Federal Circuit writes that the Supreme Court’s decisions “have had a major impact on patent law,” citing, among other evidence, the Court’s seventy percent reversal rate …
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 …
Trademarks: German Manufacturer’S Deliberate Infringement Of Domestic Trademark Sufficient To Support Injunctive Relief, But Not Supportive Of Award For Damages, Kimley R. Johnson
Trademarks: German Manufacturer’S Deliberate Infringement Of Domestic Trademark Sufficient To Support Injunctive Relief, But Not Supportive Of Award For Damages, Kimley R. Johnson
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
(In)Valid Patents, Paul Gugliuzza
(In)Valid Patents, Paul Gugliuzza
Faculty Scholarship
Increasingly, accused infringers challenge a patent’s validity in two different forums: in litigation in federal court and in post-issuance review at the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). These parallel proceedings have produced conflicting and controversial results. For example, in one recent case, a district court rejected a challenge to a patent’s validity and awarded millions of dollars in damages for infringement. The Federal Circuit initially affirmed those rulings, ending the litigation over the patent’s validity. In a subsequent appeal about royalties owed by the infringer, however, the Federal Circuit vacated the entire judgment — including the validity ruling and damages …
Balancing A Right To Be Forgotten With A Right To Freedom Of Expression In The Wake Of Google Spain V. Aepd, Shaniqua Singleton
Balancing A Right To Be Forgotten With A Right To Freedom Of Expression In The Wake Of Google Spain V. Aepd, Shaniqua Singleton
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
Brief Amicus Curiae On Behalf Of Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Mark Mckenna, Mark A. Lemley, Christopher Jon Sprigman, Rebecca Tushnett
Brief Amicus Curiae On Behalf Of Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Mark Mckenna, Mark A. Lemley, Christopher Jon Sprigman, Rebecca Tushnett
Court Briefs
No. 15-866
Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
From the Summary of Argument:
In its 1976 revision of the Copyright Act, Congress decided to separate applied art from industrial design, admitting the former to copyright and excluding the latter. It drew this distinction precisely because it intended to differentiate copyright from design and utility patent. Congress recognized as applied art only those aesthetic features of a useful article that could be “separated” from that useful article rather than being integrated into the article.
The …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors, Mark Mckenna
Brief Of Amici Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors, Mark Mckenna
Court Briefs
No. 15-14889
Edward Lewis Tobinick v. Steven Novella
Appeal from the United States Distric Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No.: 9:14-cv-80781-RLR (Hon. Robin L. Rosenber)
[Including the] Motion for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors, Nov. 30, 2015.
From the Summary of Argument
The District Court correctly determined that the challenged speech of Dr. Steven Novella was not commercial speech for purposes of applying the Lanham Act. Appellant’s argument to the contrary conflates “seeking profit” with “commercial speech.”
Early Filing And Functional Claiming, Paul Gugliuzza
Early Filing And Functional Claiming, Paul Gugliuzza
Faculty Scholarship
A major problem in the patent system is that many patents claim far more than the patentee actually invented. In his perceptive article, Ready for Patenting, Mark Lemley argues that this overclaiming is caused in part by legal doctrines that encourage inventors to file a patent application as early as possible, often before — or even instead of — building their invention. Patents issued from early-filed applications, Lemley argues, tend to be overly broad because the applicant does not yet know how the invention actually works.
This response essay, part of the Boston University Law Review’s symposium on Notice Failure …
Complete Preemption And Copyright: Toward A Successive Analysis, Mark Lindsay
Complete Preemption And Copyright: Toward A Successive Analysis, Mark Lindsay
Georgia Journal of Law & Technology
No abstract provided.
Brief Amici Curiae Of 37 Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Petition For Certiorari, Mark A. Lemley, Mark Mckenna
Brief Amici Curiae Of 37 Intellectual Property Professors In Support Of Petition For Certiorari, Mark A. Lemley, Mark Mckenna
Court Briefs
No. 15-777
Samsung Electonics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Inc.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
From the Summary of Argument:
This case presents two issues that justify this Court’s review.
First, the Federal Circuit upheld a finding of design patent infringement based on the very same Apple designs that it found functional under trade dress law. Such a counterintuitive outcome is possible because the Federal Circuit has constructed a highly constrained definition of functionality in design patent law, which is at odds with this Court’s precedent in both utility …
Judge Shopping In The Eastern District Of Texas, Jonas Anderson
Judge Shopping In The Eastern District Of Texas, Jonas Anderson
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
Judge Rodney Gilstrap has a lot of patent cases on his docket. In fact, in 2015 there were 1,686 patent cases that were filed and assigned to Judge Gilstrap, an astronomical number for a single judge. Judge Gilstrap — one of eight federal judges who sit on the Eastern District of Texas — is so popular with patent plaintiffs that over one-fourth of all patent cases in the country are heard by him. This Article addresses the problems with allowing this judge shopping to occur. It reviews the scholarship on the topic that is almost universally opposed to judge shopping …
Issue Preclusion: The Effect B&B Hardware Will Have On Trademark Litigation, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 257 (2016), Lian Osier
UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law
Trademark issues are frequently litigated in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, yet circuits were previously divided on how much weight to give those decisions. The Supreme Court provided the answer. B&B Hardware v. Hargis Indus. held that in certain circumstances, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will have a preclusive effect on federal district courts. This comment looks at what effect this ruling will have on trademark litigation in district courts by examining the cases that caused the circuit split leading up to the Supreme Court’s decision.
Ip Litigation In U.S. District Courts: 1994-2014, Matthew Sag
Ip Litigation In U.S. District Courts: 1994-2014, Matthew Sag
Faculty Articles
This Article undertakes a broad-based empirical review of intellectual property ("IP") litigation in U.S. federal district courts from 1994 to 2014. Unlike the prior literature, this study analyzes federal copyright, patent, and trademark litigation trends as a unified whole. It undertakes a systematic analysis of the records of more than 190,000 cases filed in federal courts and examines the subject matter, geographical, and temporal variation within federal IP litigation over the last two decades.
This Article analyzes changes in the distribution of IP litigation over time and their regional distribution. The key findings of this Article stem from an attempt …
Fashion Forward: The Need For A Proactive Approach To The Counterfeit Epidemic, Casey Tripoli
Fashion Forward: The Need For A Proactive Approach To The Counterfeit Epidemic, Casey Tripoli
Brooklyn Journal of International Law
In the last two decades, the overall activity of the counterfeit market has expanded and risen 10,000 percent. This dramatic shift corresponds to growth of the Internet, which has unified the fascination of obtaining cheap, illegitimate goods with the efficiency of a mouse click. With the expected continued inflation of the counterfeit market comes a host of new concerns, namely, how to determine who is responsible for the distribution of these knockoffs, and who should be ordained to limit them in the marketplace. In both the United States and the European Union, however, outdated laws produce a mélange of inadequate …
Another Bite At The Apple For Trade Secret Protection: Why Stronger Federal Laws Are Needed To Protect A Corporation's Most Valuable Property, Alissa Cardillo
Another Bite At The Apple For Trade Secret Protection: Why Stronger Federal Laws Are Needed To Protect A Corporation's Most Valuable Property, Alissa Cardillo
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
Trade secrets are one of a corporation’s most valuable assets. However, they lack adequate protection under federal law, leaving them vulnerable to theft and misappropriation. As technology advances, it becomes easier and less time consuming for individuals and entities to access and steal trade secrets to a corporation’s detriment. Most often these thefts involve stealing trade secrets in an intangible form. Current legislation fails to adequately protect intangible trade secrets, leaving them vulnerable to theft. An amendment to the National Stolen Property Act that encompasses intangible trade secrets would close a loophole that currently exists relating to intangible assets, allowing …
Patent Institutions: Shifting Interactions Between Legal Actors, Arti K. Rai
Patent Institutions: Shifting Interactions Between Legal Actors, Arti K. Rai
Faculty Scholarship
This contribution to the Research Handbook on Economics of Intellectual Property Rights (Vol. 1 Theory) addresses interactions between the principal legal institutions of the U.S. patent system. It considers legal, strategic, and normative perspectives on these interactions as they have evolved over the last 35 years. Early centralization of power by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, newly created in 1982, established a regime dominated by the appellate court's bright-line rules. More recently, aggressive Supreme Court and Congressional intervention have respectively reinvigorated patent law standards and led to significant devolution of power to inferior tribunals, including newly …
The Limits Of Statutory Interpretation: Towards Explicit Engagement, By The Supreme Court Of Canada, With The Charter Right To Freedom Of Expression In The Context Of Copyright, Graham Reynolds
All Faculty Publications
In its post-2002 copyright jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of Canada has clarified that the Copyright Act grants a significant degree of latitude to non-copyright owning parties to express themselves using copyrighted works. This outcome is attributable neither to the SCC having interpreted provisions of the Copyright Act according to Charter values nor to the SCC having weighed provisions of the Copyright Act against the section 2(b) right to freedom of expression. Rather, it has resulted from the SCC interpreting provisions of the Copyright Act through the lens of the purpose of copyright, as re-articulated by the SCC. The author argues …