The Scope of IP Rights

Lemley, Mark A.; McKenna, Mark

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2660951

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In practice, the most logical type of correlation is negative. As suggested in a recent paper by Lemley and McKenna (), wide claim construction would tend to make infringement more likely and validity less likely. Hence, the probability of validity conditional on infringement would tend to be lower than the unconditional probability of validity.…”

Section: A Model Of Patent Litigationmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Across Five Eras: Patent Validity and Infringement Rates in U.S. Courts, 1929–2006

Henry¹,

Turner²

2016

J Empirical Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We use structural break analysis to estimate rates of patent validity and infringement in decisions on the merits in U.S. courts over 1929–2006. We separately estimate these rates for district court and appeals court decisions. We find multiple structural breaks in both validity and infringement, and the breaks do not coincide. The rate of validity falls around 1939 and rises around 1983, while the rate of infringement rises around 1950 and falls around 1991. We argue that these breaks, and the variation across the implied five “eras” of decision standards, reflect political and legal innovations.

show abstract

Section: A Model Of Patent Litigationmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…For example, introducing rules generally granting wide claim construction might make it easier for the patentee to prove infringement, and easier for the alleged infringer to identify prior art to prove invalidity. See Lemley and McKenna ().…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Across Five Eras: Patent Validity and Infringement Rates in U.S. Courts, 1929–2006

Henry¹,

Turner²

2016

J Empirical Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Verify information when receiving information for knowing the truth, through this a lot of information is scattered in the world virtual reality by verifying information, people will not easily believe it with unsourced information. Finally, respect property rights intellectual property, avoid engaging in acts of piracy, illegal reproduction, or infringement of rights intellectual property in digital content because it can be subject to legal cases (Lemley & McKenna, 2015).…”

Section: The Concept Of Digital Ethics In Dealing With Challenges In ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Ethics and Citizenship Challenges in Cyberspace: An Overview From Perspective Morals and Laws

Sari,

Ningsih,

Kristina

et al. 2024

Jurnal Notariil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital ethics involve moral principles and values that govern behavior individuals and groups in digital environments. Digital ethics involves deep responsibility disseminate accurate information, maintain the quality of online communication and interaction, and awareness of the social and environmental impact of the use of digital technology. This study uses a literature study method with a descriptive qualitative approach to study ethics and challenges of citizenship in cyberspace from a moral and legal perspective. Through data analysis, found several important digital ethical concepts in dealing with challenges in cyberspace, such as responsibility in disseminating information, privacy protection and data security, digital awareness, respect for freedom of expression, verification information, and respect intellectual property rights. From a moral and legal perspective, comprehensive regulation is needed to regulate the use of digital technology, enforcement effective law against digital ethics violations, legal education and awareness, and development of online communication ethics. Challenges of citizenship faced in the world cyber through a moral and legal perspective including the spread of harmful content, respect to privacy and data, cyberbullying behavior, and use of inappropriate language. Legal regulation, protection against cyber crime, and a balance between freedoms speaking and legal boundaries are also challenges that need to be overcome.

show abstract

“…213 Those new inventions will often be imperfect substitutes, so patents will often confer some power over price. 214 But it has never been the purpose of patent law to give the patentee control over a market as opposed to a technology. Indeed, the economic evidence is pretty good that competition is itself a spur to new innovation.…”

Section: :905mentioning

confidence: 99%

Software Patents and the Return of Functional Claiming

Lemley¹

2016

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commentators have observed for years that patents do less good and causemore harm in the software industry than in other industries such aspharmaceuticals. They have pointed to a variety of problems and offered avariety of solutions.While there is some truth to each of these criticisms, the real problemwith software patents lies elsewhere. Software patent lawyers areincreasingly writing patent claims in broad functional terms. Put anotherway, patentees claim to own not a particular machine, or even a particularseries of steps for achieving a goal, but the goal itself. The resultingoverbroad patents overlap and create patent thickets.Patent law has faced this problem before. The Supreme Court ultimatelyrejected such broad functional claiming in the 1940s as inconsistent withthe purposes of the patent statute. When Congress rewrote the Patent Act in1952, it adopted a compromise position: patentees could write their claimlanguage in functional terms, but when they did so the patent would notcover the goal itself, but only the particular means of implementing thatgoal described by the patentee and equivalents thereof. These“means-plus-function” claims permitted the patentee to use functionallanguage to describe an element of their invention, but did not permit herto own the function itself however implemented.Most software patents today are written in functional terms. If courtswould faithfully apply the 1952 Act, limiting those claims to the actualalgorithms the patentees disclosed and their equivalents, they couldprevent overclaiming by software patentees and solve much of the patentthicket problem that besets software innovation.

show abstract

The Scope of IP Rights

Cited by 5 publications

References 3 publications

Across Five Eras: Patent Validity and Infringement Rates in U.S. Courts, 1929–2006

Across Five Eras: Patent Validity and Infringement Rates in U.S. Courts, 1929–2006

Digital Ethics and Citizenship Challenges in Cyberspace: An Overview From Perspective Morals and Laws

Software Patents and the Return of Functional Claiming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About