George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School

Blog

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 investigation by judges, FTC Commissioners, former USPTO directors, and Congress’ very own Government Accountability Office (GAO).  Read more

The History of Patent Licensing and Secondary Markets in Patents: An Antidote to False Rhetoric

The patent licensing business model is a flashpoint of controversy in the patent policy debates. Individuals and firms that specialize in licensing patented innovation – and companies that purchase patents in order to license them – have come under attack by the President, members of Congress, companies, lobbying groups, and others. Read more

The Failure of the DMCA Notice and Takedown System

using a laptopToday, CPIP released an important new policy brief, The Failure of the DMCA Notice and Takedown System: A Twentieth Century Solution to a Twenty-First Century Problem, by Professor Bruce Boyden of Marquette University Law School.  Professor Boyden argues that the DMCA notice and takedown system is outdated and not up to the task of reducing the availability of infringing copies of creative works.  Read more

The Internet Does Not Reset the Copyright-Free Speech Balance

Today, CPIP released an important new policy brief, “The Internet Does Not Reset the Copyright-Free Speech Balance,” by Sean O’Connor, Professor of Law at the University of Washington School of Law in Seattle.  Professor O’Connor argues that “the First Amendment and copyright law maintain the same complementary relationship in cyberspace that they have in regular space.”   Read more

The Nadir of “Patent Troll” Rhetoric

The venerable high-tech company IBM is no more a “patent troll” than any other legitimate company that engages in patent licensing. Yet, according to the very arguments of those who are using this ill-defined and misleading term, the shoe fits. Read more

Adam Mossoff on Patented Innovation, Licensing & Litigation (Transcript)

Below is the text of the oral testimony provided by Professor Adam Mossoff to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, the Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Insurance Subcommittee, in its November 7, 2013 hearing on “Demand Letters and Consumer Protection: Examining Deceptive Practices by Patent Assertion Entities.” Read more

GAO Report Confirms No “Patent Troll” Litigation Problem

As we previously reported, there are serious concerns with the studies asserting that a “patent litigation explosion” has been caused by patent licensing companies (so-called non-practicing entities (“NPEs”) or “patent trolls”). These seemingly alarming studies (see here and here) have drawn scholarly criticism for their use of proprietary, secret data collected from companies like RPX and Patent Freedom – companies whose business models are predicated on defending against patent licensing companies. Read more

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

a green screen with binary and figuresToday, 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 or processes in a specific technological field in this way; for instance, people do not talk about “automobile brake patents” or “sex toy patents” as their own category of patents deserving of approval or scorn.  Read more