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. Read more
CPIP’s Mark Schultz authored an excellent essay today in TechPolicyDaily.com advocating intellectual property as a source of personal and economic freedom. The essay, “A Free Market Perspective on Intellectual Property Rights,” describes parallels between physical property and intellectual property and dispels several denigrating myths about intellectual property’s role in a free market. Read more
[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 less litigation today than during some decades in the early nineteenth century. Read more
The Dangerous Adventurism of the United States Trade Representative:
Lifting the Ban against Apple Products Unnecessarily Opens a Can of Worms in Patent Law
In ordinary times, the business of the International Trade Commission does not appear as the lead story in the Wall Street Journal, predicting massive changes in the high-stakes patent battles. Read more
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. Read more
[This was originally posted at IBM’s A Smarter Planet Blog on January 11, 2013.]
The America Invents Act (AIA) was signed into law in September 2011, and it is rightly recognized as “the most significant reform of the U.S. patent system since 1836.” Read more
[Cross Posted to Truth on the Market on December 12, 2012]
In Part One, I addressed the argument by some libertarians that so-called “traditional property rights in land” are based in inductive, ground-up “common law court decisions,” but that intellectual property (IP) rights are top-down, artificial statutory entitlements. Read more
[Cross Posted to Truth on the Market on December 7, 2012]
In libertarian critiques of intellectual property (IP) rights, such as copyrights and patents, it’s common to the hear the claim that “traditional property rights in land” is based in inductive, ground-up “common law court decisions,” but that IP rights are top-down, artificial statutory entitlements. Read more
