Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Scenes From The Copyright Office, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This essay uses a series of vignettes drawn from Billy Joel’s career to describe his encounters with copyright law. It begins by examining the ownership of the copyright in Joel’s songs. It continues by considering the authorship of Joel’s songs, and it concludes by evaluating certain infringement actions filed against Joel. This Essay observes that Joel’s encounters with copyright law were confusing and frustrating, but also quite typical. The banality of his experiences captures the uncertainty and incoherence of copyright doctrine.

Likelihood Of Confusion Determinations: A Survey Of Eleventh Circuit Jurisprudence, Theodore H. Davis Jr.

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

The Ethics Of Deception: Pretext Investigations In Trademark Cases, Phillip Barengolts

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Pretext investigations of trademark infringement usually implicate one or more of four rules of professional responsibility: truthful communications, communications with adverse parties represented by counsel, communications with parties unrepresented by counsel, and the prohibition of deceptive behavior. There is an additional rule on using paralegals or non-lawyer assistants to do the actual investigation which also comes into play on occasion.

The Sony Legacy: Secondary Liability Perspectives, Robert I. Reis

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Sony seeded the ongoing conundrum of balancing protected intellectual property rights with the potential of technologies that enhance the use of intellectual content. New technologies that enable use also remove many copy limitations. Traditional remedies against individual infringers served their purpose of compensation and deterrence. These forms of action have been weakened where the jurisdictional, monetary and administrative underpinnings of legal administration are compromised. This complex of factors is further exacerbated by the clash between conflicting ends of protecting intellectual property rights while at the same time ensuring appropriate public beneficial use. Most enabling technologies have the potential for fundamental …

Toward Non-Neutral First Principles Of Private Law: Designing Secondary Liability Rules For New Technological Uses, Thomas C. Folsom

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

A series of recent cases revisits secondary liability in intellectual property law, solving some particular problems but without providing completely specified rules that are predictable and principled. Prior law already includes several varieties of secondary liability with a rationale for each. Together, these old and new sources point the way towards a synthesis, which may allow for a designed solution that is more fully specified, at least in respect of new technological uses. When all is said, secondary liability in intellectual property law still turns on two essential questions: (1) is there someone who is liable for direct infringement, and …

Palsgraf, Principles Of Tort Law, And The Persistent Need For Common-Law Judgment In Ip Infringement Cases, Jay Dratler Jr.

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This short paper attempts to show how courts can build-and are building-a rational jurisprudence of secondary liability for IP infringement upon the foundation of these two great common-law principles of tort law: proximate cause and culpability. Besides this introduction (Part I), the paper has four sections. Part II discusses the notion of proximate cause and its application to cases assessing liability for IP infringement. It also explores a modem, economic test for proximate cause: the concept of least-cost avoider. Part III discusses the principle of culpability in cases of secondary liability and how to reconcile it with the traditional strictness …

Contributory Infringers And Good Samaritans, Mark Bartholomew

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Part I of this Essay describes existing contributory infringement doctrine. Part II examines the circumstances in tort law where courts have found that the relationship between the defendant and the direct actor justifies imposition of a duty to control the latter. Interestingly, the ability to manage the actions of the direct actor is not the only requirement for imposing such a duty. Part III applies these findings from tort law to the specialized context of intellectual property.

An Intentional Tort Theory Of Patents, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

This Article challenges the dogma of U.S. patent law that direct infringement is a strict liability tort. Impermissibly practicing a patented invention does create liability even if the infringer did not intend to infringe or know about the patent. The consensus is that this is a form of strict liability. The flaw in the consensus is that it proves too little, for the same is true of intentional torts: intent to commit the tort is unnecessary, and ignorance of the legal right is no excuse. What is relevant is intent to perform the action that the law deems tortious. So …

Evil Angel Eulogy: Reflections On The Passing Of The Obscenity Defense In Copyright, James R. Alexander

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

You Look Complicated Today: Representing An Illegal Graffiti Artist In A Copyright Infringement Case Against A Major International Retailer, John Eric Seay

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

Patent Disclosures And Time, Timothy R. Holbrook

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Patents by their very nature are pregnant with considerations of time. The exclusive rights they afford only last for a finite period — generally from issuance until twenty years from the filing date of the application. Moreover, since patents necessarily engage with the evolution of technology, patents reflect various “snap shots” in time that reflect the state of the art at a particular moment. Patent law must constantly wrestle with time.

Many of these topics have been explored extensively in both judicial decisions and the academic literature. The most obvious example of considering the temporal aspect of patent law is…obviousness. …

Beyond The Cloud: Why The Narrow Decision In American Broadcasting Cos. V. Aereo, Inc. May Have Broader Implications For Cloud-Computing, Robyn L. Rothman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Moral Psychology Of Copyright Infringement, Christopher Buccafusco, David Fagundes

Faculty Articles

This Article presents a novel view of the complex moral psychology of infringement. It does so both to complement extant critiques of copyright’s incentivist story and to provide a realistic account of owners’ motivations for infringement on which a more effective copyright regime may be built. We elaborate these claims as follows. Part I highlights the contrast between the robust critiques of copyright’s theory of creation and the paucity of attention to its theory of litigation, and illustrates the social costs produced by increasingly common infringement suits animated by nonfinancial concerns. Part II develops a psychology of infringement, rooted in …

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

Faculty Articles

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 …

Top Tens In 2015: Patent, Trademark, Copyright And Trade Secret Cases, Stephen M. Mcjohn

Suffolk University Law School Faculty Works

The Supreme Court significantly affected the dynamics of patent litigation, holding that patent claim interpretation was not always reviewed de novo and that good faith belief that a patent was invalid was not a defense to infringement. The Federal Circuit potentially changed the approach to patent claim interpretation, holding that claims could be interpreted in light of the written description of the invention, even where the claim was not ambiguous. The Federal Circuit also addressed inducement of patent infringement, holding that it was not inducement to suggest consulting a physician who would likely prescribe an infringing treatment. The Federal Circuit …

Undetected Conflict-Of-Laws Problems In Cross-Border Online Copyright Infringement Cases, Marketa Trimble

Scholarly Works

This article provides and analyzes data on copyright infringement cases filed in U.S. federal district courts in 2013; it focuses on infringement cases involving activity on the internet and discusses actual and potential conflict-of-laws issues that the cases raised or could have raised. The article complements the report entitled "Private International Law Issues in Online Intellectual Property Infringement Disputes with Cross-Border Elements: An Analysis of National Approaches" (the "Report"), which was published by the World Intellectual Property Organization in September 2015. In the Report its author, Professor Andrew F. Christie, discusses his empirical findings about the intersection of intellectual property …

"Blurred Lines" Means Changing Focus: Juries Composed Of Musical Artists Should Decide Music Copyright Infringement Cases, Not Lay Juries, Jason Palmer

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The verdict in Williams v. Bridgeport Music, Inc., or the "Blurred Lines" case, surprised a lot of people. It surprised the public, as many did not expect there to be infringement. It also surprised the litigants, because the jury's special verdict form contained a logical inconsistency indicating that something had been decided incorrectly. However, the jury cannot be faulted for this inconsistency because it was tasked with deciphering the indecipherable. The fault lies in the way copyright law establishes infringement. This Note investigates the apparent circuit split in determining music copyright infringement and proposes that it is illusory. All circuits …

You(Tube), Me, And Content Id: Paving The Way For Compulsory Synchronization Licensing On User-Generated Content Platforms, Nicholas Thomas Delisa

Brooklyn Law Review

The changing landscape of digital media technology makes it increasingly difficult for owners of copyrighted music to monitor how their works are being exploited across the Internet. This is especially true of user-generated content (UGC) platforms—websites and applications such as Facebook, YouTube, and Snapchat, where content is created or uploaded predominantly by users. These services pose a special problem to copyright owners because, instead of content being uploaded from a single source that is easily sued and has deep pockets, content is uploaded by users. Users are a troublesome group because they are innumerable, sometimes anonymous, and mostly click on …

Fighting Piracy With Censorship: The Operation In Our Sites Domain Seizures V. Free Speech, Michael Joseph Harrell

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

Diametrically Opposing Viewpoints: Why Polar Opposites Should Not Attract The Parody Label Under The Fair Use Exception To Copyright Infringement, Robyn M. Flegal

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

Unauthorized Digital Sampling In The Changing Music Landscape, Ryan Lloyd

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

Fault Lines In Trademark Default Judgments, David S. Welkowitz

Georgia Journal of Law & Technology

No abstract provided.

Patent Trolls And Preemption, Paul Gugliuzza

Faculty Scholarship

Patent law is usually thought to be the domain of the federal government, not state governments. Yet over half the states have recently passed statutes outlawing unfair or deceptive assertions of patent infringement. The statutes are aimed at fighting so-called patent trolls, particularly those who send letters to users of allegedly infringing technology — as opposed to the manufacturers of that technology — demanding that each user purchase a license for a few thousand dollars or else face an infringement suit. The Federal Circuit, however, has held that state law claims challenging acts of patent enforcement are preempted by the …

Aereo, In-Line Linking, And A New Approach To Copyright Infringement For Emerging Technologies, Shannon Mcgovern

Catholic University Law Review

In an ever-changing technological landscape, strictly adhering to the language and definitions of the Copyright Act in cases involving emerging technologies may contravene the purpose and intent of copyright law. However, the Supreme Court’s 2014 opinion in American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo Inc. puts forth a commercial interest rationale that suggests copyright infringers may no longer be able to avoid liability based on perceived technological loopholes that have typically absolved online infringers of infringement liability. This Note argues that Aereo’s commercial interest rationale paves the way for a new approach to technologically complex copyright cases, particularly where in-line linking …

A Path Toward An Increased Role For The United States In Patent Infringement Litigation, Caroline M. Turner

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

A number of major statutory schemes implicate federal interests but do not provide for explicit authority for the United States to bring lawsuits for damages or to obtain injunctive relief. The patent statutes provide that the patentee may sue in the case of infringement, and court decisions have extended that right to certain licensees. Accordingly, the United States has participated in cases in which it is not a co-patentee or licensee only as an amicus. Yet the government arguably has an interest in intervening in or instituting, as a co-plaintiff, infringement cases involving certain patents. Recent scholarship has renewed attention …

Richard Prince, Author Of The Catcher In The Rye: Transforming Fair Use Analysis, Brockenbrough A. Lamb

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Upside-Down Inequitable Conduct Defense, Tun-Jen Chiang

Northwestern University Law Review

“Inequitable conduct” is a patent law doctrine that renders a patent unenforceable when the patentee is found to have acted improperly before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. It is widely reviled and frequently criticized for being draconian: the Federal Circuit has famously called the doctrine an “absolute plague” that terrorizes patent owners. Responding to the concern about overdeterrence, the Federal Circuit has repeatedly narrowed the doctrine.

This Article takes a different perspective. The conventional wisdom is correct enough in arguing that the inequitable conduct doctrine sometimes produces overdeterrence. What has been overlooked, however, is the fact that the doctrine …

A Fresh Look At Tests For Nonliteral Copyright Infringement, Pamela Samuelson

Northwestern University Law Review

Determining whether a copyright has been infringed is often straightforward in cases involving verbatim copying or slavish imitation. But when there are no literal similarities between the works at issue, ruling on infringement claims becomes more difficult. The Second and Ninth Circuits have developed five similar yet distinct tests for judging nonliteral copyright infringement. This Essay argues that each of these tests is flawed and that courts have generally failed to provide clear guidance about which test to apply in which kinds of cases.

This Essay offers seven specific strategies to improve the analysis of nonliteral infringements. Courts should do …

Ip Basics: Copyright In Visual Arts, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This discussion focuses on the needs of free-lance artists, craftspeople, photographers, sculptors and the like.

Digital Patent Infringement In An Era Of 3d Printing, Timothy R. Holbrook, Lucas Osborn

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The digital revolution has now moved beyond music and video files. A person can now translate three-dimensional objects into digital files and, at the press of a button, recreate those items via a 3D printer or similar device. Just as digitization placed pressure on the copyright system, so will these digital computer-aided design (CAD) files stress the patent system. Patents directed to physical objects can now have their value appropriated — not by the transfer of physical embodiments — but by the making, selling, and transferring of CAD files designed to print the invention. We term this phenomenon digital patent …