A Patent Panacea? The Promise Of Corbinized Claim Construction,
2010
Chicago-Kent College of Law
A Patent Panacea? The Promise Of Corbinized Claim Construction, Jonathan L. Moore
Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property
No abstract provided.
Past, Present, And Future In The Life Of The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
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.
The Upside Of Intellectual Property's Downside,
2010
University of Richmond
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 …
Particularizing Patent Pleading: Pleading Patent Infringement In A Post-Twombly World,
2010
University of Richmond
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, …
Does Ip Need Ip? Accommodating Intellectual Production Outside The Intellectual Property Paradigm,
2010
New York University School of Law
Does Ip Need Ip? Accommodating Intellectual Production Outside The Intellectual Property Paradigm, Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Getting To Best Practices - A Personal Voyage Around Fair Use,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
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 …
Proving Fair Use: Burden Of Proof As Burden Of Speech,
2010
University of Arkansas School of Law
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 …
Intellectual Propriety: Compulsory Licenses Through The Trips Agreement And The Doha Declaration On Public Health,
2010
SIT Study Abroad
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 …
The Future Of Books Related To The Law?,
2010
UCLA School of Law
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 …
Briefing Cases: Session On Copyright Law,
2010
University of Baltimore
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.
Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Spaziano Declaration,
2010
Skadden LLP
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?
Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Bill Lloyd Declaration (Google Ad Support Team Lead),
2010
Google
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?
Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Declaration Of Cheryl Galvin,
2010
Google
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?
Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 76 - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management),
2010
Google
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?
Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. R - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management),
2010
Google
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?
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 36 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Responses To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories,
2010
Santa Clara Law
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?
Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 34 - Deposition Of Susan Wojcicki (Google Vice President - Product Management),
2010
Google
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?
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures,
2010
Santa Clara Law
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?
Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories,
2010
Santa Clara Law
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?
Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 51 - Adams Deposition (Rosetta Stone Ceo),
2010
Rosetta Stone
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?
