MENU

Intellectual Property

Does Patent Litigation Need a Federal Solution? - Podcast

Intellectual Property Practice Group Podcast
Eli Dourado, Jay Kesan May 13, 2015

The America Invents Act, the first substantial legislative changes to patent law, took effect two years ago. Late last year, attempts to reform patent law stalled when late opposition to the proposed act was voiced. This year, a number of legislative proposals are under consideration in both houses of Congress. Some proponents of patent reform cite increasing patent litigation as a key indicator that reform is necessary, while opponents argue that the empirical evidence used to support those claims is faulty. Our experts debated new and old empirical evidence, and the underlying need for further patent reform.  Professor Kesan referred to a PowerPoint prseentation available for download on this page.

  • Eli Dourado, Director of Technology Policy Program, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University School of Law
  • Prof. Jay Kesan, H. Ross & Helen Workman Research Scholar, Director, Program in Intellectual Property and Technology Law, University of Illinois College of Law

Should a royalty agreement exceed the life of a patent?

Short video featuring Greg Dolin
Gregory Dolin May 12, 2015

Professor Greg Dolin of the University of Baltimore School of Law discusses the dispute in Kimble v. Marvel, a case argued before the Supreme Court in March.  Petitioner Kimble invented and patented a toy.  Respondent Marvel contractually agreed to pay royalties on that patent that included a period of time after the expiration of the patent.  The Court is being asked to overrule a precedent dating back to 1964 which held such agreements to be unlawful per se.  

As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

Hana Financial v. Hana Bank - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 5-11-15 featuring Michael Risch
Michael Risch May 11, 2015

On January 21, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank. This trademark case involved a rule called "tacking", which permits the owner of a trademark to modify the trademark without losing the priority established by being the first user of the trademark. Tacking, however, is only permitted as long as the modified trademark establishes "the same, continuing commercial impression so that consumers consider both as the same mark."

The question in this case was whether the judge or the jury should determine whether a consumer would consider the original trademark and the modified trademark to be the same.

In an opinion delivered by Justice Sotomayor, the Court unanimously held that the jury, rather than a court, should determine whether the use of an older trademark may be tacked to a newer one.  The judgment of the Ninth Circuit was affirmed.

To discuss the case, we have Michael Risch, who is a Professor of Law at the Villanova University School of Law.

Patent Agreements, Patent Validity, and the Supreme Court - Podcast

Intellectual Property Practice Group Podcast
Gregory Dolin April 20, 2015

In two separate cases to be argued the week of March 30, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court continued to provide close oversight, often with critical disagreement, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the area of patent law. The Supreme Court will decide whether a patentee’s use of a royalty agreement that projects beyond the expiration date of the patent is unlawful per se. In a second case, the Court will determine whether a defendant's belief that a patent is invalid is a defense to induced infringement. Our expert was on hand to hear the oral arguments and reported to our Teleforum audience.

  • Prof. Gregory Dolin, Co-director, Center for Medicine and Law, University of Baltimore School of Law

Innovation and Inequality: Conservative and Libertarian Perspectives - Event Audio/Video

2015 National Student Symposium
Richard A. Epstein, Elizabeth Kregor, John O. McGinnis, Frank H. Easterbrook April 17, 2015

We are in an age of accelerating technology but many fear we are also in an age of growing inequality. Does the fast pace of innovation pose a threat to social stability? Many fear that machines will take away jobs from the less skilled and extend the reach of superstars, thus deepening inequality. This panel will address the dangers of innovation to employment and equality and what, if anything, the government should do about it.

  • Prof. Richard Epstein, NYU School of Law
  • Ms. Beth Kregor, Director of the Institute for Justice Clinic on Entrepreneurship at the University of Chicago Law School
  • Prof. John McGinnis, Northwestern University School of Law
  • Moderator: Hon. Frank Easterbrook, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

This program was presented on February 21, 2015, as part of the 2015 Federalist Society National Student Symposium.