Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Beyond Formal University Technology Transfer: Innovative Pathways For Knowledge Exchange, Jacob H. Rooksby

Law Faculty Publications

University technology transfer is often associated with formal transmission of science-based inventions, for instance through the licensing of patented technology to a firm. Formal conceptions of technology transfer limit our ability to understand fully how scientific knowledge evolves into industrial and social application. In this introductory article, we discuss how knowledge is shared and accessed across boundaries, and argue for a broader conceptualization including the transfer, translation, and transformation of knowledge. This view underlies a necessary conceptual shift from formal technology transfer to a more encompassing conception of pathways for knowledge exchange. We discuss promising avenues for extending research on …

Artificial Intelligence And Copyright Law In Singapore A Study On The Protection Of Compilations And Databases Arranged By Ai-Systems, Sella Say

Chulalongkorn University Theses and Dissertations (Chula ETD)

While the capability of artificial intelligence ("AI") gains remarkable momentum in creating copyrightable materials – the questions regarding the eligibility of these new creations, at the moment, are broadly discussed and posed challenges to the regime. The problem of how we fit the conventional notion of authorship and the condition of originality for AI-generated works remains a controversial topic. Some might suggest that subject matter created by AI should not be granted copyright protection on the presumption that AI is not a human who could treat as authors of works. At the same time, other supportive claims that the first …

U.S. Supreme Court I.P. Cases, 1810-2019: Measuring & Mapping The Citation Networks, Joseph S. Miller

Scholarly Works

Intellectual property law in the United States, though shaped by key statutes, has long been a common-law field to a great degree. Many decades of decisional law flesh out the meaning of broad-textured, sparely worded statutes. Given the key roles of patent law and copyright law, both federal, the Supreme Court of the United States is i.p. law’s leading apex court. What are the major topical currents in the Supreme Court’s i.p. cases, both now and over the course of the Court’s work? This study uses network-analysis tools to measure and map the entirety of the Court’s i.p. jurisprudence. It …

Illusory Conflicts: Post-Employment Clearance Procedures And The Ftc’S Technological Expertise, Lindsey Barrett, Laura M. Moy, Paul Ohm, Ashkan Soltani

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The federal government restricts what former employees can work on after they leave the government, and for good reason. These post-employment conflict restrictions attempt to address the “revolving door” problem, where employees take information learned from their position in government to unfairly advantage industry. But an unintended consequence of overbroad conflict rules is that they impede well-meaning, former federal employees from providing their knowledge and general expertise to other enforcement agencies with similar missions, such as those at the state level. This is playing out right now with FTC technologists, at a time when the agency—and, indeed, consumer protection agencies …

The Supreme Court Bar At The Bar Of Patents, Paul Gugliuzza

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past two decades, a few dozen lawyers have come to dominate practice before the U.S. Supreme Court. By many accounts, these elite lawyers—whose clients are often among the largest corporations in the world—have spurred the Court to hear more cases that businesses care about and to decide those cases in favor of their clients. The Supreme Court’s recent case law on antitrust, arbitration, punitive damages, class actions, and more provides copious examples.
/="/">
/="/">Though it is often overlooked in discussions of the emergent Supreme Court bar, patent law is another area in which the Court’s agenda has …

Response To Oliar And Stern: On Duration, The Idea/Expression Dichotomy, And Time, Wendy J. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

Courts often use possession to determine who should own unclaimed resources. Yet, as Oliar and Stern demonstrate, the concept of possession is little more than a metaphor, capable of being applied to a broad range of phenomena. The authors helpfully deploy “time” as a metric to sort through the rules determining what should count as possession, and they survey the likely costs and benefits attached to choosing earlier versus later events as triggers for acquiring title.

With those tools in hand, Oliar and Stern employ “time” and the analogy of physical possession to address problems in copyright, patent, and trademark …