Tesla’s New Patent Policy: Long Live the Patent System!

Last Thursday, Elon Musk, the founder and CEO of Tesla Motors, issued an announcement on the company’s blog with a catchy title: “All Our Patent Are Belong to You.” Commentary in social media and on blogs, as well as in traditional newspapers, jumped to the conclusion that Tesla is abandoning its patents and making them “freely” … Continue reading “Tesla’s New Patent Policy: Long Live the Patent System!”

Demand Letters and Mandatory Disclosures: First Amendment Concerns

In the recent calls to revise the patent system to address so-called “patent trolls” — an ill-defined term that effectively derails any discussion of patent policy based in reality — Congress is considering bills that would impose mandatory disclosures on all demand letters sent by patent owners. Although there is no definitive definition of what … Continue reading “Demand Letters and Mandatory Disclosures: First Amendment Concerns”

The Unintended Consequences of Patent "Reform"

By Steven Tjoe Much of today’s patent policy debate focuses on the dynamics of patent litigation.  Sensational anecdotes of abusive demand letters, litigants strategically exploiting bad patents, and tales of so-called “patent trolls” (reinforced by now debunked empirical claims) have captured the public’s imagination and spurred Congress to rush to revise the patent system.  Unfortunately, … Continue reading “The Unintended Consequences of Patent "Reform"”

An Insightful Analysis of “Fair and Reasonable” in the Determination of FRAND Terms

By Steven Tjoe In his forthcoming George Mason University Law Review article entitled “The Meaning of ‘Fair and Reasonable’ in the Context of Third-Party Determination of FRAND Terms,” Professor Damien Geradin explores the delicate balance of interests protected by the current system of arm’s length negotiations in the standard-setting process, and the detrimental effect disrupting … Continue reading “An Insightful Analysis of “Fair and Reasonable” in the Determination of FRAND Terms”

Crowdfunding's Impact on Start-Up IP Strategy

By Sean M. O’Connor* Crowdfunding has been heralded as a revolutionary and democratic way to connect ordinary individuals with innovative projects they would like to support. The version involving equity investments in start-ups will be regulated under the U.S. JOBS Act of 2012.[i] But start-ups who use this legal pathway will become essentially “junior” reporting … Continue reading “Crowdfunding's Impact on Start-Up IP Strategy”

Two More Reasons to Think Twice Before Changing Our Patent System

By Steven Tjoe Today, misguided fears of an explosion of patent litigation and the specter of the so-called “patent troll” problem continue to influence the popular perception of patent policy.  Over the past year, various organizations have spurred a movement to make significant legislative changes to our patent system, despite calls for caution and further … Continue reading “Two More Reasons to Think Twice Before Changing Our Patent System”

A Brief History of Software Patents (and Why They’re Valid)

Today, there is significant public debate over patents on the digital processes and machines that comprise computer software programs. These are often referred to as “software patents,” but this is an odd moniker. Aside from the similarly mislabeled debate over “DNA patents,” nowhere else in the patent system do we refer to patents on machines … Continue reading “A Brief History of Software Patents (and Why They’re Valid)”

The Myth of the “Patent Troll” Litigation Explosion

[Cross posted at Truth on the Market] In a prior blog posting, I reported how reports of a so-called “patent litigation explosion” today are just wrong.  As I detailed in another blog posting, the percentage of patent lawsuits today are not only consistent with historical patent litigation rates in the nineteenth century, there is actually … Continue reading “The Myth of the “Patent Troll” Litigation Explosion”

The Value of Injunctions – Douglas Dynamics v. Buyers Products Co. (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2013)

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Douglas Dynamics, LLC, v. Buyers Products Co. (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2013) is very important given the widespread, albeit mistaken, belief today that the Supreme Court’s decision in eBay v. MercExchange (2005) established that damages and not injunctions are the presumptive remedy for patent infringement.  For those in the … Continue reading “The Value of Injunctions – Douglas Dynamics v. Buyers Products Co. (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2013)”

Guest Post by Wayne Sobon: A Line in the Sand on the Calls for New Patent Legislation

On June 9-11, the IP Business Congress sponsored by Intellectual Asset Magazine (IAM) hosted a debate on the resolution: “This house believes that the America Invents Act should be a legislative line in the sand and that no more reform of the US patent system is needed.” The debate was moderated by Denise DeFranco, a partner with … Continue reading “Guest Post by Wayne Sobon: A Line in the Sand on the Calls for New Patent Legislation”