Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Intellectual Property And Related Rights In Climate Data, Michael Carroll

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This chapter focuses on the ways in which intellectual property law can act as a barrier to data sharing. Intellectual property laws supply exclusive rights that can enable a researcher, employer or funder to ‘own’ data; they can then bring legal claims against persons who access or reuse data without permission. Some of these rights attach automatically to data, data sets, or databases, and thus must be managed properly to enable robust data sharing in climate science. Other rights are created by contract, and the policies around such privately created rights must be understood and analyzed. This chapter briefly describes …

The Federal Big Data Research And Development Strategic Plan, The Networking And Information Technology Research And Development Program, Big Data Senior Steering Group

Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.

This document was developed through the contributions of the NITRD Big Data SSG members and staff. A special thanks and appreciation to the core team of editors, writers, and reviewers: Lida Beninson (NSF), Quincy Brown (NSF), Elizabeth Burrows (NSF), Dana Hunter (NSF), Craig Jolley (USAID), Meredith Lee (DHS), Nishal Mohan (NSF), Chloe Poston (NSF), Renata Rawlings-Goss (NSF), Carly Robinson (DOE Science), Alejandro Suarez (NSF), Martin Wiener (NSF), and Fen Zhao (NSF).

A national Big Data1 innovation ecosystem is essential to enabling knowledge discovery from and confident action informed by the vast resource of new and diverse datasets that are rapidly …

Patent "Trolls" And Claim Construction, Greg Reilly

Notre Dame Law Review

This Article explores the largely overlooked relationship between claim construction and patent assertion entities (patent “trolls”), finding that claim construction problems and trends benefit patent assertion entities. First, the Federal Circuit’s deep divide over the proper approach to claim construction creates uncertain patent scope, which is widely recognized as a core reason for the success of patent assertion entities. Second, case law and commentary increasingly endorse an approach to claim construction that relies on the “general meaning” in the technical field with limited reliance on the patent itself, which benefits patent assertion entities by increasing the breadth and uncertainty of …

The Supreme Court's Quiet Revolution In Induced Patent Infringement, Timothy R. Holbrook

Notre Dame Law Review

The Supreme Court over the last decade or so has reengaged with patent law. While much attention has been paid to the Court’s reworking of what constitutes patent-eligible subject matter and enhancing tools to combat “patent trolls,” what many have missed is the Court’s reworking of the contours of active inducement of patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The Court has taken the same number of § 271(b) cases as subject matter eligibility cases—four. Yet this reworking has not garnered much attention in the literature. This Article offers the first comprehensive assessment of the Court’s efforts to define active …

The Knottiest Problem: Unraveling Arising Under Jurisdiction In Copyright Cases, Zoe Niesel, Bethany A. Corbin

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

How Oracle Erred: Functionality, Useful Articles, And The Future Of Computer Copyright, Wendy J. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

In Oracle v. Google (2015), the Federal Circuit addressed whether the " method header " components of a dominant computer program were uncopyrightable as " merging " with the headers' ideas or function. Google had copied the headers to ease the ability of third-party programmers to interact with Google's Android platform. The court rebuffed the copyrightability challenge; it reasoned that because the plaintiff's expression might have been written in alternative forms, there was no " merger " of idea and expression. But the Oracle court may have been asking the wrong question. In Lotus v. Borland (1995), the owner of …

Celebrities’ Expansive “Right Of Publicity” Infringes Upon Advertisers’ First Amendment Rights, Jon Siderits

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Ttab Decisions No Longer The “Red-Headed Stepchild” Of Precedential Authority, Rebecca Knight

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Remanded Decision In Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, & Sage Publications Vs. Georgia State University Et Al., Orinda D. Evans

Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.

Defendants' Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiffs' Remand Brief and to Disregard Declaration [Doc. 502] is GRANTED. This case is currently before the Court for fair use analysis with respect to 48 infringement claims. Plaintiffs are entitled to prevail on the claims involving 7 works in Georgia State classes. With respect to the other infringement claims, Defendants are entitled to prevail.

Defendants are the prevailing side and are entitled to an award of costs and attorneys' fees.

Expanding The Reissue Procedure: A Better Way To Do Business, Allan G. Altera

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Paul Heald's "Resolving Priority Disputes In Intellectual Property Collateral": A Comment, Robert H. Rotstein

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Resolving Priority Disputes In Intellectual Property Collateral, Paul Heald

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Copyright And The Constitution In The Age Of Intellectual Property, David Lange

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Fair Use For Computer Programs And Other Copyrightable Works In Digital Form: The Implications Of Sony, Galoob And Sega, Pamela Samuelson

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Copyright And "The Exclusive Right " Of Authors, L. Ray Patterson

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Redigi And The Resale Of Digital Media: The Courts Reject A Digital First Sale Doctrine And Sustain The Imbalance Between Copyright Owners And Consumers, Monica L. Dobson

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Part II of this comment will explain the history of the first sale doctrine, observe how Congress has modified the doctrine over time, and examine how the courts have interpreted the doctrine in light of various technological innovations. Part III will address the problems associated with digital media and examine the concerns of both copyright owners and consumers surrounding a digital first sale doctrine. Part IV will discuss the recent federal district court case, Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., which dealt with the issue of the first sale doctrine’s applicability to digital media, and explain why the court …

Internationalization And Local Elements: Research On Recent Amendments To The Trademark Law Of China, Xiaoqing Feng

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This article will explore varying aspects of the amendments of the Chinese Trademark Law. Part Two deals with detailed analysis and the reasons for the third amendment of the Trademark Law; this part is composed of five sections. The first section discusses the perfection of the application system for trademark registration, including the increase of the number of elements eligible for trademark registration, the implementation of “one trademark for multi categories,” the improvement of the system of opposition, the introduction of a proposal review system, and the availability for submitting electronic applications. The second section discusses (1) the improvement of …

The Experiences Of Trips-Compliant Patent Law Reforms In Brazil, India, And South Africa And Lessons For Bangladesh, M. Monirul Azam

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This study analyzes the policy options used by Brazil, India, and South Africa in their transitions to a TRIPS-compliant patent law and their introduction of pharmaceutical patents. This comparative review can be used to explore possible policy options that can also be utilized by LDCs, including Bangladesh.

Give Me Liberty And Give Me Death: The Conflict Between Copyright Law And Estates Law, Michael Rosenbloum

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Unjust Enrichment For Patent Infringement: A Novel Idea?, Mohamed Yusuf M. Mohamed

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Wobbling On The Shoulders Of Giants: The Supreme Court's Failure In Lotus V. Borland, Bradley W. Grout

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

How To Avoid Infringing The Copyright Of A Computer Program: From The Perspective Of A Computer Program Turned Attorney/Law Professor, David C. Tunick

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Ofac: Hands Off Intellectual Property Rights, Keith Stolte

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Copyright And Free Speech Rights, L. Ray Patterson, Stanley F. Birch, Jr.

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Vol. 4:1, Journal Of Intellectual Property Law

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Jury's Role In Patent Cases: Markman V. Westview Instruments, Inc., Paul N. Higbee Jr.

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

1995 Antitrust Guidelines For The Licensing Of Intellectual Property: Harmonizing The Commercial Use Of Legal Monopolies With The Prohibitions Of Antitrust Law, Thomas L. Hayslett Iii

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Replenishing The Ink Of The Poison Pen: Restricting The Scope Of § 43(A) Of The Lanham Act In Garland Co. V. Ecology Roof Systems Corp., Ashley H. Draughon

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

But How Far? Rite-Hite Corp. V. Kelley Co.'S Expansion Of The Scope Of Patent Damages, Robert J. Cox

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Unofficial Opinion Of The Attorney General Of The State Of Georgia: The Scope Of The Fair Use Doctrine, Department Of Law State Of Georgia, Michael E. Hobbs, L. Ray Patterson

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.