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

Intellectual Property Law Commons™

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

2010

Discipline
Institution
Keyword
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 151 - 180 of 618

Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law

2009 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Donald R. Dunner, Bryan C. Diner, Esther H. Lim, Troy E. Grabow, Tina E. Hulse, Joyce Craig Apr 2010

2009 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Donald R. Dunner, Bryan C. Diner, Esther H. Lim, Troy E. Grabow, Tina E. Hulse, Joyce Craig

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Dynamic Federalism And Patent Law Reform, Xuan-Thao Nguyen Apr 2010

Dynamic Federalism And Patent Law Reform, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Indiana Law Journal

Patent law is federal law, and the normative approach to patent reform has been top down, looking to Congress and the Supreme Court for changes to the broken and complex patent system. The normative approach thus far has not yielded satisfactory results. This Article challenges the static approach to patent reform and embraces the dynamic-federalism approach that patent reform can be an overlapping of both national and local efforts. Patent reform at the local level is essential as locales can serve as laboratories for changes, vertically compete with national government to reform certain areas of the patent system, and become …

Go to article

Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech, Ned Snow Apr 2010

Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech, Ned Snow

Faculty Publications

Courts have created a burden of proof in copyright that chills protected speech. The doctrine of fair use purports to ensure that copyright law does not trample rights of speakers whose expression employs copyrighted material. Yet those speakers face a burden of proof that weighs heavily in the fair use analysis, where factual inquiries are often subjective and speculative. Failure to satisfy the burden means severe penalties, which prospect quickly chills the free exercise of speech that constitutes a fair use. The fair-use burden of proof is repugnant to the fair use purpose. Today, copyright holders are exploiting the burden …

Go to article

Doctrine Of The Dead: How Capcom V. Mkr Exposes The Decreasing Fit Between Modern Copyright Infringement Analysis And Modern Video Games, Karlyn Ruth Meyer Apr 2010

Doctrine Of The Dead: How Capcom V. Mkr Exposes The Decreasing Fit Between Modern Copyright Infringement Analysis And Modern Video Games, Karlyn Ruth Meyer

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Go to article

What Is Neutral? Another Perspective To The Discussion Concerning Access Control, Agustin Waisman Apr 2010

What Is Neutral? Another Perspective To The Discussion Concerning Access Control, Agustin Waisman

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Market Competition In Aid Of Humanitarian Concern: Reconsidering Pharmaceutical Drug Patents, Michael Ilg Apr 2010

Market Competition In Aid Of Humanitarian Concern: Reconsidering Pharmaceutical Drug Patents, Michael Ilg

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Go to article

A Patent Panacea? The Promise Of Corbinized Claim Construction, Jonathan L. Moore Apr 2010

A Patent Panacea? The Promise Of Corbinized Claim Construction, Jonathan L. Moore

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Past, Present, And Future In The Life Of The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Paul R. Michel Apr 2010

Past, Present, And Future In The Life Of The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Paul R. Michel

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, Christopher A. Cotropia, James Gibson Apr 2010

The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside, Christopher A. Cotropia, James Gibson

Law Faculty Publications

Intellectual property law exists because exclusive private rights provide an incentive to innovate. This is the traditional upside of intellectual property: the production of valuable information goods that society would otherwise never see. In turn, too much intellectual property protection is typically viewed as counterproductive, as too much control in the hands of private rightsholders creates more artificial scarcity and imposes more costs on future innovators than the incentive effect warrants. This is the traditional downside of intellectual property: reduced production and impeded innovation. This Article turns the traditional discussion on its head and shows that intellectual property’s putative costs …

Go to article

Particularizing Patent Pleading: Pleading Patent Infringement In A Post-Twombly World, Jonathan L. Moore Apr 2010

Particularizing Patent Pleading: Pleading Patent Infringement In A Post-Twombly World, Jonathan L. Moore

Law Student Publications

The Supreme Court's recent jurisprudence has reinvigorated the role of pleading in civil litigation. As a result, in order to survive a motion to dismiss, plaintiffs must now include more detailed allegations that demonstrate a plausible entitlement to relief. This article examines how these changes interact with the pleading requirements for patent infringement litigation. In recent years, the number of patent infringement lawsuits has increased dramatically, in part because of lax notice pleading requirements. This patent litigation explosion imposes exorbitant costs on defendants and has a detrimental effect on innovation. As courts begin to apply the new plausibility pleading regime, …

Go to article

Does Ip Need Ip? Accommodating Intellectual Production Outside The Intellectual Property Paradigm, Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss Apr 2010

Does Ip Need Ip? Accommodating Intellectual Production Outside The Intellectual Property Paradigm, Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Getting To Best Practices - A Personal Voyage Around Fair Use, Peter Jaszi Apr 2010

Getting To Best Practices - A Personal Voyage Around Fair Use, Peter Jaszi

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

These days, I view fair use as a central feature of the law around our information ecology - its presence reminding us, from day to day, that there is more to copyright than maximization, and that innovation happens when the doctrinal settings are loose enough to permit a good deal of "play" (literally and figuratively) in the system. But before the mid-1990s I thought little about the fair use doctrine and did less. As I suspect may be true of other copyright lawyers of my generation (and the ones preceding it, I spent most of my professional career taking fair …

Go to article

Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech, Ned Snow Apr 2010

Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech, Ned Snow

Cardozo Law Review

Courts have created a burden of proof in copyright that chills protected speech. The doctrine of fair use purports to ensure that copyright law does not trample rights of speakers whose expression employs copyrighted material. Yet those speakers face a burden of proof that weighs heavily in the fair use analysis, where factual inquiries are often subjective and speculative. Failure to satisfy the burden means severe penalties, which prospect quickly chills the free exercise of speech that constitutes a fair use. The fair-use burden of proof is repugnant to the fair use purpose. Today, copyright holders are exploiting the burden …

Go to article

Intellectual Propriety: Compulsory Licenses Through The Trips Agreement And The Doha Declaration On Public Health, Samuel Mintzer Fuchs Apr 2010

Intellectual Propriety: Compulsory Licenses Through The Trips Agreement And The Doha Declaration On Public Health, Samuel Mintzer Fuchs

Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection

The Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS), part of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations led to the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, has led to a variety of interpretations and opinions. Though its application goes beyond matters of public health, it is this area that has come under the most scrutiny in the last fifteen years as the gaps between developed and developing countries have widened and exposed the health disparities between the two groups. Tensions over intellectual property and access to newly developed medicines to treat diseases such as HIV and …

Go to article

The Future Of Books Related To The Law?, Eugene Volokh Apr 2010

The Future Of Books Related To The Law?, Eugene Volokh

Michigan Law Review

People have been reading books for over 500 years, in more or less the same format. Book technology has changed in some measure during that time. Fonts have become more readable. Books have become more affordable. Still, the general form of the book has remained much the same. But the arrival of e-readers, such as the Kindle and the Sony eBook, offers the possibility of a major change. First, people may shift to reading existing books on those e-readers. Second, the shift may lead them to change the way they use books, for instance by letting people have many reference …

Go to article

Briefing Cases: Session On Copyright Law, Lynn Mclain Mar 2010

Briefing Cases: Session On Copyright Law, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This handout contains the decision from Walt Disney Productions v. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751 (1978), suggested elements for how to brief a case in general, and an example brief for the Air Pirates case.

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Spaziano Declaration, Jennifer Spaziano Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Spaziano Declaration, Jennifer Spaziano

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Bill Lloyd Declaration (Google Ad Support Team Lead), Bill Lloyd Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Bill Lloyd Declaration (Google Ad Support Team Lead), Bill Lloyd

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Declaration Of Cheryl Galvin, Cheryl Galvin Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Declaration Of Cheryl Galvin, Cheryl Galvin

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 76 - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 76 - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. R - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. R - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 36 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Responses To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 36 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Responses To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 34 - Deposition Of Susan Wojcicki (Google Vice President - Product Management), Susan Wojcicki Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 34 - Deposition Of Susan Wojcicki (Google Vice President - Product Management), Susan Wojcicki

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 51 - Adams Deposition (Rosetta Stone Ceo), Tom Adams Mar 2010

Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 51 - Adams Deposition (Rosetta Stone Ceo), Tom Adams

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 74 - Thomas Deposition (Rosetta Counterfeit Software Customer), Diana Thomas Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 74 - Thomas Deposition (Rosetta Counterfeit Software Customer), Diana Thomas

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. A - Alferness Deposition (Google Ad Products Senior Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. A - Alferness Deposition (Google Ad Products Senior Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 23 - Deposition Of Jonathan Alferness (Google Adwords Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 23 - Deposition Of Jonathan Alferness (Google Adwords Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 73 - Tabatabai Deposition (Rosetta Online Marketing Specialist), Nicole Tabatabai Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 73 - Tabatabai Deposition (Rosetta Online Marketing Specialist), Nicole Tabatabai

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

First Prev Next Last