Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Scholarship Chronologically

Articles 121 - 132 of 132

Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law

Note On Caselaw Showing The “Property” Issue - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1984

Note On Caselaw Showing The “Property” Issue - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

The "misappropriation as property" issue has surfaced in Lanham Act

Go to article

Draft Of Conceptual/Linguistic Analysis - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1984

Draft Of Conceptual/Linguistic Analysis - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

Conceptually, what I'm interested in here is the extent to which the labels “tort” and “property” have utility. So I am interested in discovering also what these categories mean, how they can be used, and the danger in their misuse.

Go to article

Outline Of Issues Key: Revised Version - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1984

Outline Of Issues Key: Revised Version - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Note On Individualized V Particularized Entitlement Inquiries - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1984

Note On Individualized V Particularized Entitlement Inquiries - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

My analysis now looks something like this: Some entitlements should be "prima facie" protectible from invasion. That means that there are some entitlements which the owner should be able to protect even if he or she is unable to prove (a) that protection is in the net social interest or (b) that the invader's action is deserving of punishment. I would call these entitlements "property".

Go to article

Note On The Problem Of Flexible Standards - 1983, Wendy J. Gordon Dec 1983

Note On The Problem Of Flexible Standards - 1983, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

My basic contention is that courts have been giving plaintiffs tort and property rights in intangible without any greater justification than that those persons had “created” the intangible.

Go to article

Draft Of The Misappropriation Explosion: Thoughts On The Development Of Property Rights - 1983, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1983

Draft Of The Misappropriation Explosion: Thoughts On The Development Of Property Rights - 1983, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

The piece on which I am currently working explores courts' growing willingness to create tort and property rights in the intellectual property area, and their insensitivity to any danger of paralysis which a large degree of exclusivity may impose on an interdependent society. The following will summarize the directions the article is taking at this preliminary stage of research and thinking.

Go to article

Draft Of Fair Use As Market Failure: A Structural And Economic Analysis Of The Betamax Case And Its Predecessors - 1982, Wendy J. Gordon Dec 1982

Draft Of Fair Use As Market Failure: A Structural And Economic Analysis Of The Betamax Case And Its Predecessors - 1982, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

In the recent and much publicized Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Sony Corp. of America (Betamax) case, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that persons who make videotapes of copyrighted television programs in the privacy of their homes should be considered to be copyright infringers. Basic to the court's reasoning was a misunderstanding of the "fair use" doctrine. Called "the most troublesome [doctrine] in the whole law of copyright," "fair use" renders noninfringing certain uses of copyrighted material that might technically violate the statute, but which do not violate the statute's basic purposes.

Go to article

Notes Re Betamax - 1982, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1982

Notes Re Betamax - 1982, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

There's a lot of misunderstanding of by BX article. Some simplifying things: There are three types of "market failure" in copyright. The first inheres in the nonexhaustibil ity of the good; barring a right to post-dissemination control against copying, goods may be underproduced because potential users will refuse to pay for access, figuring they can get access to a friend's copy later for free or at lower cost than the creator would charoe. Thus. relying only o~ the physical control which lets i creato~ charge for the "first look", will (except where the look wont' make copying possible- the trade …

Go to article

Abstract Of Gift Failure Versus Market Failure - 1982, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1982

Abstract Of Gift Failure Versus Market Failure - 1982, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

Gifts and gift exchanges can serve a combination of economic, personal, social, and humanitarian ends. This article explores how intellectual products are unusually capable of serving these ends through gift relations, and suggests ways in which the law can assist in this process.

Go to article

Notes On Preemption And Misc - 1981, Wendy J. Gordon Jun 1981

Notes On Preemption And Misc - 1981, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

As one of my students indirectly commented (the Herzog midterm?), section 301 PURPORTS to be exclusive. "Nothing in this title shall annul state rights etc." One student, Chris Binnig, indirectly suggested a way out of the exclusivity problem, other than the common sense of Abrams, namely that 301 talks about the general scope of copyright- something which may require some policy inquiry.

Go to article

Notes On Misc Re Contract - 1981, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1981

Notes On Misc Re Contract - 1981, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

Once there is a patent, voluntarily-accepted user restrictions may not be enforceable. Or, at least, an attempt on the patentee's part to condition access of certain types on obtaining such restrictions, may be impossible. See 30 BNA PTCJ 104 (5/30/85)(Restrictions voided on availability of deposited yeast strains.) Filed under Yeast case.

Go to article

Lecture Draft On Sensory Recall Device - 1980, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1980

Lecture Draft On Sensory Recall Device - 1980, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

Perception is a bodily function. The brain “sees” according to the orders which the optic nerve relays from its position at the back of the eye. Similarly, it is the brain which also "hears." As we know from our dreaming and our remembering, neither eye nor ear is indispensable to having the sensations of seeing and hearing.

Go to article

First Prev