Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Patently Obvious

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Patent Law

: Patently Obvious

Patently-O Bits and Bytes No. 55: IP Scholars Edition

By Dennis Crouch, Esq.

ADVERTISEMENTS

A Debate on Patent Policy: Obama (representatives) vs. McCain (representatives). August 28 in Denver (on the last day of the Democratic convention). See Professors Sprigman and Rai defenda Obama against Reines and Gifford. [LINK]
Stanford's IP Scholars Conference included lots of interesting academic works in progress. Here are a few examples [LINK].
- Chiang (George Mason): Ex Post Claiming ? "Patent law permits moving the fence to enclose the neighbors' new house, and then evicting the neighbors for trespassing." Chiang proposes a rule to eliminate any claim amendments made after a patent has issued (i.e., no continuation amendments). Pre-allowance amendments would be given the priority date of the amendment.
- Chien (Santa Clara): The Cold War is not over. Discussing how the arms-race justification of filing patents is alive and well.
- Cotropia (Richmond): Proposing a requirement that inventions be reduced to practice before patent filing.
- Crouch (Missouri): Considering the justification of design patent protection as an alternative rule of evidence for protecting trade dress rights.
- Greenbaum (Stanford): Explaining why University Tech Transfer offices should be abolished and university inventors should get to keep their rights.
- Hemphill (Columbia): Empirical work on generic drug settlements in the shadow of Hatch-Waxman.
- Kapczynski (Berkeley): India's progress in implementing TRIPS obligations for pharmaceutical inventions.
- Liivak (Cornell): Examining ways of modifying patent law to encourage competition without relying solely on granting anti-competitive rights.
- Masur (UChicago): Discussing the positive value of costly patent prosecution. It serves as a screen to block many worthless patents.
- Pulsinelli (Tennessee): Proposing that new matter restrictions be softened to allow the addition of best mode information. This is important for international applicants who do not face the best mode requirement in their home countries.
- Sichelman (Berkeley): Proposing a new form of intellectual property based on commercialization of new technology.
- Vermont (George Mason): Narrowing the doctrine of equivalents over time.
Non-patent, but really interesting:
- Bartow (South Carolina): Counterfeits, Copying, Class, and Confusion.
- Oliar and Sprigman (Virginia): IP norms in Stand-up Comedy.
- Rowe (Florida): New Generation Employees and Trade Secrets