2010 Section Officers
Chair:
Katherine Strandburg
New York
University
Chair-Elect:
Mark McKenna
University
of Notre Dame
Executive Board:
Stacey Dogan
(Immediate Past Chair)
Boston
University School of Law
Greg Mandel
Temple
University
Jeanne
Fromer
Fordham
University
IP Conference Schedule
Section
ByLaws
Links
Copyright Society of the
U.S.A.
International Association for the
Advancement of Teaching & Research in Intellectual Property
International Trademark Association
National Association of Patent
Practitioners
National Patent Law
Association
U.S. Copyright Office
U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
World Intellectual Property Organization
Webmaster
Michael Madison
University of Pittsburgh School of
Law
madison[at]pitt[dot]edu
Last
revised: July 2010
|
The Intellectual Property Law Section of the
Association of American Law Schools was organized to facilitate the
study of intellectual property in American law schools and to provide a
forum for law faculty members engaged in the teaching of intellectual
property and related subjects to exchange ideas.
Scholarship
The entries below are obtained via the
electronic version of the Current Index to Legal Periodicals; beginning
with February 2007, the dates indicated correspond to the publication
date of the CILP.
July 2010
- Barrett, Margreth. Reconciling fair use and
trademark use. 28 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 1-63 (2010).
- Bu, Qingxiu. Coca-Cola v.
Huiyuan—market-economy driven or protectionism? 41 IIC:
Int’l Rev. Intell. Prop. & Competition L. 201-210
(2010).
- Cotropia, Christopher A. and James Gibson.
The upside of intellectual property’s downside. 57 UCLA L.
Rev. 921-982 (2010).
- Eiland, Murray Lee. The role of the
individual inventor in pharmaceutical patents. 18 U. Balt. Intell.
Prop. L.J. 1-37 (2009).
- Ershov, Kirill. A macabre fixation: is
plastination copyrightable? 32 U. Haw. L. Rev. 125-151 (2009).
- Harhoff, Dietmar. Patent system
design—an economic perspective. 41 IIC: Int’l Rev.
Intell. Prop. & Competition L. 121-122 (2010).
- Hick, Darren Hudson. Conceptual problems of
conceptual separability and the non-usefulness of the useful
articles distinction. 57 J. Copyright Soc’y U.S.A. 37-57
(2009-2010).
- Keele, Benjamin J. Copyright provisions in
law journal publication agreements. 102 Law Lib. J. 269-283
(2010).
- Ku, Raymond Shih Ray. F(r)ee expression?
Reconciling copyright and the First Amendment. 57 Case W. Res. L.
Rev. 863-893 (2007).
- Kupzok, Agniezka, Monique Sturny-Luder and
Gintarė Surblytė. Foundations and Limitations of an
Economic Approach to Competition Law—conference of the Max
Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax
Law, March 2009. 41 IIC: Int’l Rev. Intell. Prop. &
Competition L. 210-226 (2010).
- Landers, Amy L. Ordinary creativity in
patent law: the artist within the scientist. 75 Mo. L. Rev. 1-77
(2010).
- Liang, Zhiwen. Between freedom of commerce
and protection of moral rights: the Chinese experience and a
comparative analysis. 57 J. Copyright Soc’y U.S.A. 107-159
(2009-2010).
- Lipton, Jacqueline D. “We, the
paparazzi”: developing a privacy paradigm for digital video.
95 Iowa L. Rev. 919-984 (2010).
- Make It Available at Your Own Risk. Jay
Dougherty, moderator; Russell Frackman and Matthew Neco, panelists.
30 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 1-37 (2009).
- Makeen, Makeen F. The controversy of
simultaneous cable retransmission to hotel rooms under
international and European copyright laws. 57 J. Copyright
Soc’y U.S.A. 59-105 (2009-2010).
- Pessach, Guy. The New Israeli Copyright
Act—a case study in reverse comparative law. 41 IIC:
Int’l Rev. Intell. Prop. & Competition L. 187-201
(2010).
- Sen, Rajarshi and Adarsh Ramanujan. Pruning
the evergreen tree or tripping over TRIPS?—Section 3(d) of
the Indian Patents Act, 1970. 41 IIC: Int’l Rev. Intell.
Prop. & Competition L. 170-186 (2010).
- Tilmann, Winifried. Validity of selective
product claims—Venice Conferences III and V, Lundbeck and
Olanzapin. 41 IIC: Int’l Rev. Intell. Prop. & Competition
L. 149-169 (2010).
- Wadlow, Christopher. Strasbourg, the
forgotten patent convention, and the origins of the European
patents jurisdiction. 41 IIC: Int’l Rev. Intell. Prop. &
Competition L. 123-149 (2010).
- Constructing Commons in the Cultural
Environment. 95 Cornell L. Rev. 657-850 (2010).
- Madison, Michael J., Brett M. Frischmann and Katherine J.
Strandburg. Constructing commons in the cultural environment.
95 Cornell L. Rev. 657-709 (2010).
- Responses
- Eggertsson, Thráinn. Mapping social technologies in the
cultural commons. 95 Cornell L. Rev. 711-732 (2010).
- Gordon, Wendy J. Discipline and nourish: on constructing
commons. 95 Cornell L. Rev. 733-755 (2010).
- Macey, Gregg P. Cooperative institutions in cultural commons.
95 Cornell L. Rev. 757-792 (2010).
- Merges, Robert P. Individual creators in the cultural
commons. 95 Cornell L. Rev. 793-805 (2010).
- Ostrom, Elinor. The institutional analysis and development
framework and the commons. 95 Cornell L. Rev. 807-815
(2010).
- Solum, Lawrence B. Questioning cultural commons. 95 Cornell
L. Rev. 817-837 (2010).
- Reply
- Madison, Michael J., Brett M. Frischmann and Katherine J.
Strandburg. Reply: the complexity of commons. 95 Cornell L.
Rev. 839-850 (2010).
- style="color:#800000"Law, Technology and the Arts Symposium: The
WIPO Copyright Treaties: 10 years later. 57 Case W. Res. L. Rev.
729-861 (2007).
- Lipton, Jacqueline. Introduction. 57
Case W. Res. L. Rev. 729-730 (2007).
- Vaver, David. Copyright and the
Internet: from owner rights and user duties to user rights and
owner duties? 57 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 731-750 (2007).
- Dinwoodie, Graeme. The WIPO Copyright
Treaty: a transition to the future if international copyright
lawmaking? 57 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 751-766 (2007).
- Rajan, Mira T. Sundara. Center stage:
performers and their moral rights in the WPPT. 57 Case W. Res.
L. Rev. 767-778 (2007).
- Hinze, Gwen. Brave new world, ten years
later: reviewing the impact of policy choices in the
implementation of the WIPO Internet treaties’
technological protection measure provisions. 57 Case W. Res. L.
Rev. 779-821 (2007).
- Liu, Joseph. Comment on Gwen Hinze. 57
Case W. Res. L. Rev. 823-828 (2007).
- Davison, Mark. Database protection:
lessons from Europe, Congress, and WIPO. 57 Case W. Res. L.
Rev. 829-854 (2007).
June 2010
May 2010
- Baker, Steven N. and Matthew Lee Fesak. Who
cares about the counterfeiters? How the fight against
counterfeiting has become an in rem process. 83 St. John’s L.
Rev. 735-794 (2009).
- Bridy, Annemarie. Why pirates (still)
won’t behave: regulating P2P in the decade after Napster. 40
Rutgers L.J. 565-611 (2009).
- Carroll, Michael W. One size does not fit
all: a framework for tailoring intellectual property rights. 70
Ohio St. L.J. 1361-1434 (2009).
- Crouch, Dennis D. Is novelty
obsolete? Chronicling the irrelevance of the invention date in U.S.
patent law. 16 Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 53-107
(2009).
- Cotter, Thomas F. A Burkean perspective on
patent eligibility, part II: reflections on the (counter)revolution
in patent law. 11 Minn. J. L. Sci. & Tech. 365-381 (2010).
- Gómez-Arostegui, H. Tomás. Prospective
compensation in lieu of a final injunction in patent and copyright
cases. 78 Fordham L. Rev. 1661-1731 (2010).
- Holbrook, Timothy R. Equivalency and patent
law’s possession paradox. 23 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 1-48
(2009).
- Johnson, Eric E. Intellectual
property’s need for a disability perspective. 20 Geo. Mason
U. Civ. Rts. L.J. 181-208 (2010)
- Larson, Edward J. Murder will out:
rethinking the right of publicity through one classic case. 62
Rutgers L. Rev. 131-162 (2009).
- Love, Brian J. The misuse of reasonable
royalty damages as a patent infringement deterrent. 74 Mo. L. Rev.
909-948 (2009).
- Marden, Emily. Open source drug
development: a path to more accessible drugs and diagnostics? 11
Minn. J. L. Sci. & Tech. 217-266 (2010).
- Nard, Craig Allen. Legal forms and the
common law of patents. 90 B.U. L. Rev. 51-108 (2010).
- Outterson, Kevin. The legal ecology of
resistance: the role of antibiotic resistance in pharmaceutical
innovation. 31 Cardozo L. Rev. 613-678 (2010).
- Ram, Natalie. Assigning rights and
protecting interests: constructing ethical and efficient legal
rights in human tissue research. 23 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 119-177
(2009).
- Roh, David. Two copyright cases from a
literary perspective. 22 Law & Lit. 110-141 (2010).
- Rosen, Zvi S. In search of the Trade-Mark
Cases: the nascent treaty power and the turbulent origins of
federal trademark law, 83 St. John’s L. Rev. 827-904
(2009).
- Rothman, Jennifer E. Liberating copyright:
thinking beyond free speech. 95 Cornell L. Rev. 463-534 (2010).
- Shipley, David E. A dangerous
undertaking indeed: juvenile humor, raunchy jokes, obscene
materials and bad taste in copyright. 98 Ky. L.J. 517-572
(2009-2010).
- Torrance, Andrew W. Gene concepts, gene
talk, and gene patents. 11 Minn. J. L. Sci. & Tech. 157-191
(2010).
- Young, Julie Cromer. From the mouths of
babes: protecting child authors from themselves. 112 W. Va. L. Rev.
431-467 (2010).
- Zain, Saami. Quanta leap or much ado
about nothing? An analysis on the effect of Quanta vs. LG
Electronics. 20 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 67-121
(2010).
April
2010
- Arewa, Olufunmilayo B. Blues lives: promise
and perils of musical copyright. 27 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J.
573-619 (2010).
- Baker, Scott. Can the courts rescue us from
the patent crisis? (Reviewing Dan L. Burk and Mark A. Lemley, The
Patent Crisis and How the Courts Can Solve It.) 88 Tex. L. Rev.
593-610 (2010).
- Baldrica, John. Cover songs and Donkey
Kong: the rationale behind compulsory licensing of musical
compositions can inform a fairer treatment of user-modified
videogames. 11 N.C. J.L. & Tech. 103-143 (2009).
- Beebe, Barton. Intellectual property law
and the sumptuary code. 123 Harv. L. Rev. 809-889 (2010).
- Bezanson, Randall and Andrew Finkelman.
Trespassory art. 43 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 245-322 (2010).
- Birnhack, Michael D. Who owns Bratz? The
integration of copyright and employment law. 20 Fordham Intell.
Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 95-163 (2009).
- Carson, David O. Horace S. Manges Lecture.
Making the making available right available. 33 Colum. J.L. &
Arts 135-163 (2010).
- Cotter, Thomas F. and Irina Y. Dmitrieva.
Integrating the right of publicity with First Amendment and
copyright preemption analysis. 33 Colum. J.L. & Arts 165-225
(2010).
- Devlin, Alan. Indeterminism and the
property-patent equation. 28 Yale L. & Pol’y Rev. 61-106
(2009).
- Dinwoodie, Graeme B., Rochelle C. Dreyfuss
and Annette Kur. The law applicable to secondary liability in
intellectual property cases. 42 N.Y.U. J. Int’l L. & Pol.
201-235 (2009).
- Dogan, Stacey L. Beyond trademark use. 8 J.
on Telecomm. & High Tech. L. 135-155 (2010).
- Epstein, Richard A. The disintegration of
intellectual property? A classical liberal response to a premature
obituary. 62 Stan. L. Rev. 455-521 (2010).
- Fagundes, David. Property rhetoric and the
public domain. 94 Minn. L. Rev. 652-705 (2010).
- Fortney, Katie. Ending copyright claims in
state primary legal materials: toward an open source legal system.
102 Law Lib. J. 59-68 (2010).
- Gerhardt, Deborah R. Consumer investment in
trademarks. 88 N.C. L. Rev. 427-500 (2010).
- Golden, John M. Principles for patent
remedies. 88 Tex. L. Rev. 505-592 (2010).
- Hillman, Robert A. and Maureen A.
O’Rourke. Rethinking consideration in the electronic age. 61
Hastings L.J. 311-335 (2009).
- Hughes, Justin. Locke’s 1694
memorandum (and more incomplete copyright historiographies). 27
Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 555-572 (2010).
- Kapczynski, Amy. Harmonization and its
discontents: a case study of TRIPS implementation in India’s
pharmaceutical sector. 97 Cal. L. Rev. 1571-1649 (2009).
- Kodak, James A. Drug patent purchasing: a
potent means of lowering drug prices while encouraging innovation.
13 Quinnipiac Health L.J. 39-50 (2009).
- Lee, Peter. Toward a distributive commons
in patent law. 2009 Wis. L. Rev. 917-1016.
- Lemley, Mark A. and Mark McKenna.
Irrelevant confusion. 62 Stan. L. Rev. 413-454 (2010).
- Levy, Ed, et al. Patent pools and genomics:
navagiting a course to open science? 16 B.U. J. Sci. & Tech. L.
75-101 (2010).
- Liu, Jiarui. The tough reality of copyright
piracy: a case study of the music industry in China. 27 Cardozo
Arts & Ent. L.J. 621-661 (2010).
- McCabe, Justin. Enforcing intellectual
property rights: a methodology for understanding the enforcement
problem in China. 8 Pierce L. Rev. 1-29 (2009).
- Menell, Peter S. and David Nimmer. Judicial
resistance to copyright law’s inalienable right to terminate
transfers. 33 Colum. J.L. & Arts 227-239 (2010).
- Nese, Bryan. Bilski on biotech: the
potential for limiting negative impact of gene patents. 46 Cal. W.
L. Rev. 137-175 (2009).
- Ponte, Lucille M. Echoes of the sumptuary
impulse: considering the threads of social identity, economic
protectionism, and public morality in the proposed Design Piracy
Prohibition Act. 12 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 45-92 (2009).
- Sag, Matthew. Copyright and copy-reliant
technology. 103 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1607-1682 (2009).
March 2010
February 2010
- Barnett, Jonathan M. Property as process:
how innovation markets select innovation regimes. 119 Yale L.J.
384-456 (2009).
- Caulfield, Timothy. Human gene patents:
proof of problems? 84 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 133-145 (2009).
- Chiang, Tun-Jen. Fixing patent boundaries.
108 Mich. L. Rev. 523-575 (2010).
- Conley, John M. Gene patents and the
product of nature doctrine. 84 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 109-132
(2009).
- Crane, Daniel A. Intellectual liability. 88
Tex. L. Rev. 253-300 (2009).
- Devlin, Alan. Standard-setting and the
failure of price competition. 65 N.Y.U. Ann. Surv. Am. L. 217-267
(2009).
- Hilgartner, Stephen. Intellectual property
and the politics of emerging technology: inventors, citizens, and
powers to shape the future. 84 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 197-224
(2009).
- Karlan, Pamela S. Constitutional law as
trademark. 43 UC Davis L. Rev. 385-410 (2009).
- Lauriat, Barbara. Charles Reade’s
roles in the drama of Victorian dramatic copyright. 33 Colum. J.L.
& Arts 1-35 (2009).
- McKenna, Mark P. Testing modern trademark
law’s theory of harm. 95 Iowa L. Rev. 63-117 (2009).
- Nusbaum, Hon. Suzanne, Jonathan T. Rubens
and Phong D. Nguyen. Survey of the law of cyberspace: intellectual
property cases 2008. 65 Bus. Law. 229-250 (2009).
- Oliar, Dotan. The (constitutional)
Convention on IP: a new reading. 57 UCLA L. Rev. 421-480
(2009).
- Olson, David S. Taking the utilitarian
basis for patent law seriously: the case for restricting patentable
subject matter. 82 Temp. L. Rev. 181-240 (2009).
- Rosloff, Genevieve P. “Some rights
reserved”: finding the space between all rights reserved and
the public domain. 33 Colum. J.L. & Arts 37-80 (2009).
- Shulman, Seth. Upstream without a paddle:
gene patenting and the protection of the
“infostructure.” 84 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 91-108
(2009).
- Seymore, Sean B. Serendipity. 88 N.C. L.
Rev. 185-211 (2009).
- Strauss, Debra M. The application of TRIPS
to GMOs: international intellectual property rights and
biotechnology. 45 Stan. J. Int’l L. 287-320 (2009).
- Siegel, Jonathan R. Law and longitude. 84
Tul. L. Rev. 1-66 (2009).Stolper, Sean and Joseph C. Cane, Jr.
Parody in an era of online programming. 11 Tex. Rev. Ent. &
Sports L. 81-97 (2009).
- Thomas, W. John. The devil and Mr. Johnson:
a bluesman’s cultural legacy at an intellectual property
crossroads. 11 Tex. Rev. Ent. & Sports L. 1-26 (2009).
- Symposium: Digital Entrepreneurship: The
Incentives and Legal Ricks. 112 W. Va. L. Rev. 1-206 (2009).
- Risch, Michael. Virtual
rule of law. 112 W. Va. L. Rev. 1-52 (2009).
- Fairfield, Joshua A.T. The
end of the (virtual) world. 112 W. Va. L. Rev. 53-95 (2009).
- Mtima, Lateef. Copyright
social utility and social justice interdependence: a paradigm for
intellectual property empowerment and digital entrepreneurship. 112
W. Va. L. Rev. 97-151 (2009).
- Groves, Roger M. Facebook 2
Blackberry and database trading systems: morphing social networking
to business growth in a global recession. 112 W. Va. L. Rev.
153-186 (2009).
- Jackson, Janet Thompson.
Capitalizing on digital entrepreneurship for low-income residents
and communities. 112 W. Va. L. Rev. 187-198 (2009).
- Chandler, Mark. The patent
system’s relationship to digital entrepreneurship. 112 W. Va.
L. Rev. 199-206 (2009).
- The Boundaries of Intellectual Property
Symposium. 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 327-896 (2009).
- Hardy, Trotter.
Introduction. 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 327-343 (2009).
- The Boundaries of Copyright
and Trademark/Consumer Protection Law
- Burk, Dan L. and Brett H.
McDonnell. Trademarks and the boundaries of the firm. 51 Wm. &
Mary L. Rev. 345-394 (2009).
- Mazzone, Jason.
Administering fair use. 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 395-437
(2009).
- Samuelson, Pamela and Tara
Wheatland. Statutory damages in copyright law: a remedy in need of
reform. 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 439-511 (2009).
- Tushnet, Rebecca. Economies
of desire: fair use and marketplace assumptions. 51 Wm. & Mary
L. Rev. 513-546 (2009).
- Winn, Jane and Nicolas
Jondet. A new deal for end users? Lessons from a French innovation
in the regulation of interoperability. 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev.
547-576 (2009).
- The Boundaries of Patent
Law
- Bagley, Margo A. The new
invention creation activity boundary in patent law. 51 Wm. &
Mary L. Rev. 577-608 (2009).
- Duffy, John F. Rules and
standards on the forefront of patentability. 51 Wm. & Mary L.
Rev. 609-653 (2009).
- Lemley, Mark A.
Distinguishing lost profits from reasonable royalties. 51 Wm. &
Mary L. Rev. 655-674 (2009).
- Meurer, Michael J. Patent
examination priorities. 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 675-709
(2009).
- Crossing Boundaries
- Dinwoodie, Graeme B.
Developing a private international intellectual property law: the
demise of territoriality? 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 711-800
(2009).
- Frischmann, Brett.
Spillovers theory and its conceptual boundaries. 51 Wm. & Mary
L. Rev. 801-824 (2009).
January 2010
- Allison, John R., Mark A. Lemley and Joshua Walker. Extreme value
or trolls on top? The characteristics of the most-litigated
patents. 158 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1-37 (2009).
- Atkinson, Scott E., Alan C. Marco and John L. Turner. The
economics of a centralized judiciary: uniformity, forum shopping,
and the Federal Circuit. 52 J.L. & Econ. 411-443 (2009).
- Bambauer, Derek E. Cybersieves. 59 Duke L.J. 377-446 (2009).
- Bartholomew, Mark. Cops, robbers, and search engines: the
questionable role of criminal law in contributory infringement
doctrine. 2009 BYU L. Rev. 783-845.
- Brauneis, Robert. The transformation of originality in the
progressive-era debate over copyright in news. 27 Cardozo Arts
& Ent. L.J. 321-373 (2009).
- Cotropia, Christopher A. The folly of early filing in patent law.
61 Hastings L.J. 65-129 (2009).
- de Beer, Jeremy and Christopher D. Clemmer. Global trends in
online copyright enforcement: a non-neutral role for network
intermediaries? 49 Jurimetrics J. 375-409 (2009).
- Dillbary, J. Shahar. Trademarks as a media for false advertising.
31 Cardozo L. Rev. 327-365 (2009).
- Garza Barbosa, Roberto. The philosophical approaches to
intellectual property and legal transplants. The Mexican Supreme
Court and NAFTA Article 1705. 31 Hous. J. Int'l L. 515-564
(2009).
- Gasaway, Laura N. A defense of the public domain: a scholarly
essay. 101 Law Lib. J. 451-470 (2009).
- Hu, Robert H. Protecting intellectual property in China: a
selective bibliography and resource for research. 101 Law Lib. J.
485-515 (2009).
- Judge, Elizabeth F. and Daniel Gervais. Of silos and
constellations: comparing notions of originality in copyright law.
27 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 375-408 (2009).
- Ku, Raymond Shih Ray, Jiayang Sun and Yiying Fan. Does copyright
law promote creativity? An empirical analysis of copyright’s
bounty. 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1669-1746 (2009).
- Lipton, Jacqueline D. To © or not to ©? Copyright and innovation
in the digital typeface industry. 43 UC Davis L. Rev. 143-192
(2009).
- Luppino, Anthony J. Fixing a hole: eliminating ownership
uncertainties to facilitate university-generated innovation. 78
UMKC L. Rev. 367-427 (2009).
- Magliocca, Gerard N. Patenting the curve ball: business methods
and industry norms. 2009 BYU L. Rev. 875-903.
- Miller, Joseph Scott. Hoisting originality. 31 Cardozo L. Rev.
451-495 (2009).
- Rosenblatt, Elizabeth L. Rethinking the parameters of trademark
use in entertainment. 61 Fla. L. Rev. 1011-1082 (2009).
- Rowe, Elizabeth A. Contributory negligence, technology, and trade
secrets. 17 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 1-37 (2009).
December 2009
- Aoki, Keith. Seeds of dispute:
intellectual-property rights and agricultural biodiversity. 3
Golden Gate U. Envtl. L.J. 79-160 (2009).
- Ashtar,
Reuven. Theft, transformation, and the need of the immaterial: a
proposal for a fair use digital sampling regime. 19 Alb. L.J. Sci.
& Tech. 261-318 (2009).
- Brown, Christopher A. Recent
developments in intellectual property law. 42 Ind. L. Rev.
1071-1092 (2009).
- Jacobi, Tonja and Matthew Sag. Taking the measure
of ideology: empirically measuring Supreme Court cases. 98 Geo.
L.J. 1-75 (2009).
- Kur, Annette. Of oceans, islands, and inland water
- how much room for exceptions and limitations under the three-step
test? 8 Rich. J. Global L. & Bus. 287-350 (2009).
- Mazeh, Yoav. Modifying fixation: why fixed works
need to be archived to justify the fixation requirement. 8 Loy. L.
& Tech. Ann. 109-140 (2008-2009).
- Nikolic, Aleksandar.
Securitization of patents and its continued viability in light of
the current economic conditions. 19 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech.
393-420 (2009).
- Parchomovsky,
Gideon and Alex Stein. Originality. 95 Va. L. Rev. 1505-1550
(2009)
- Plotkin, Thomas and Tarae Howell. “Fair is
foul and foul is fair:” have insurers loosened the
chokepoint of copyright and permitted fair use’s breathing
space in documentary films? 15 Conn. Ins. L.J. 407-494
(2008-2009).
- Intellectual Property and Indigenous Peoples
Symposium. 15 Tex. Wesleyan L. Rev. 207-494 (2009).
- Conway,
Danielle M. Indigenizing intellectual property law: customary
law, legal pluralism, and the protection of indigenous
peoples’ rights, identity, and resources. 15 Tex.
Wesleyan L. Rev. 207-256 (2009).
- Cross,
John T. Justifying property rights in Native American
traditional knowledge. 15 Tex. Wesleyan L. Rev. 257-293
(2009).
- Erstling,
Jay. Using patents to protect traditional knowledge. 15 Tex.
Wesleyan L. Rev. 295-333 (2009).
- Green,
Daniel Austin. Indigenous intellect: problems of calling
knowledge property and assigning it rights. 15 Tex. Wesleyan L.
Rev. 335-356 (2009).
November 2009
Ackerman, John R. Toward open source hardware, 34 U.
Dayton L. Rev. 183-222 (2009).
Cahoy, Daniel R. and Leland Glenna. Private ordering
and public energy innovation policy. 36 Fla. St. U. L. Rev.
415-458 (2009).
Carrier, Michael A. Unsettling drug patent
settlements: a framework for presumptive illegality. 108 Mich. L.
Rev. 37-80 (2009).
Cotropia, Christopher A. Modernizing patent
law’s inequitable conduct doctrine. 24 Berkeley Tech. L.J.
723-783 (2009).
Dreyfuss, Rochelle Cooper and Lawrence S. Pope.
Dethroning Lear? Incentives to innovate after
MedImmune. 24 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 971-1007
(2009).
Frohlich, Anita B. Copyright infringement in the
Internet age--primetime for harmonized conflict-of-laws rules? 24
Berkeley Tech. L.J. 851-896 (2009).
Geradin, Damien. Pricing abuses by essential patent
holders in a standard-setting context: a view from Europe. 76
Antitrust L.J. 329-357 (2009).
Grynberg, Michael. Things are worse than we think:
trademark defenses in a “formalist” age. 24 Berkeley
Tech. L.J. 897-970 (2009).
Irving, Tom, Lauren L. Stevens and Scott M.K. Lee.
Nonobviousness in the U.S. post-KSR for innovative drug
companies. 34 U. Dayton L. Rev. 157-182 (2009).
Isaacs, Davida H. and Robert M. Farley.
Privilege-wise and patent (and trade secret) foolish? How the
courts’ misapplication of the Military and State Secrets
Privilege violates the Constitution and endangers national
security. 24 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 785-818 (2009).
Khoury, Amir H. “Measuring the
immeasurable”--the effects of trademark regimes: a case
study of Arab countries. 26 J.L. & Com. 11-70
(2006-07).
Rey, René Joseph. Regulatory challenges, antitrust
hurdles, intellectual property incentives, and the collective
development of aerospace vehicle-enabling technologies and
standards: creating an industry foundation. 35 J. Space L. 75-162
(2009).
Spoo, Robert. Ezra Pound’s copyright statute:
perpetual rights and the problem of heirs. 56 UCLA L. Rev.
1775-1834 (2009).
Ware, Hon. James and Brian Davy. The history,
content, application and influence of the Northern District of
California’s Patent Local Rules. 25 Santa Clara Computer
& High Tech. L.J. 965-1032 (2009).
Symposium Review. Shifting Strategies in Patent Law:
How the ITC, Non-Practicing Entities, and Inequitable Conduct are
Changing the Patent Arena. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High
Tech. L.J. 701-882 (2009).
de Blank, Bas and Bing Cheng. Where is the ITC going
after Kyocera? 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech.
L.J. 701-721 (2009).
Bohrer, David, Matt Lynde and Elizabeth M.N. Morris.
The shifting sands of price erosion: price erosion damages shift
by tens of millions of dollars depending upon the admissibility of
pre-notice eroded prices. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech.
L.J. 723-763 (2009).
Kieff, F. Scott, Robert G. Kramer and Robert M.
Kunstadt. It’s your turn, but it’s my move:
intellectual property protection for sports “moves.”
25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 765-785
(2009).
Lim, Lily and Sarah E. Craven. Injunctions enjoined;
remedies restructured. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech.
L.J. 787-819 (2009).
Lyons, Michael J., Andrew J. Wu and Harry F. Doscher.
Exclusion of downstream products after Kyocera: a revised
framework for general exclusion orders. 25 Santa Clara Computer
& High Tech. L.J. 821-838 (2009).
Puknys, Erik R. and student Jared D. Schuettenhelm.
Application of the inequitable conduct doctrine after
Kingsdown. 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J.
839-882 (2009).
Open Source and Proprietary Models of Innovation:
Beyond Ideology. 30 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 1-507
(2009).
McManis, Charles R. Introduction. 30 Wash. U. J.L.
& Pol’y 1-15 (2009).
Part I: Business, Law, and Engineering
Perspectives on Open Source Innovation
West, Joel. Policy challenges of open, cumulative,
and user innovation. 30 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 17-41
(2009).
Piper, S. Tina. The tools and levers of access to
patented health related genetic invention in Canada. 30 Wash. U.
J.L. & Pol’y 43-77 (2009).
Jakiela, Mark J. Contribution attribution as the
possible next step for “crowdsourced” engineering
design and product development. 30 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y
79-92 (2009).
Part II: Open Source Biotechnology
Torrance, Andrew W. Open source human evolution. 30
Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 93-138 (2009).
Part III: Open Source and Proprietary
Software
Kelty, Christopher M. Conceiving open systems. 30
Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 139-177 (2009).
Vetter, Greg R. Slouching toward open innovation:
free and open source software for electronic health information.
30 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 179-259 (2009).
Gomulkiewicz, Robert W. Open source license
proliferation: helpful diversity or hopeless confusion? 30 Wash.
U. J.L. & Pol’y 261-291 (2009).
Part IV: Collaborative Innovation, the Economics
of Innovation, and Constructed Commons
Sawyer, Keith. The collaboratibe nature of
innovation. 30 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 293-324
(2009).
Boldrin, Michele and Davis K. Levine. Market
structure and property rights in open source industries. 30 Wash.
U. J.L. & Pol’y 325-363 (2009).
Madison, Michael J., Brett M. Frischmann and Katherine
J. Strandburg. The university as constructed cultural commons. 30
Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 365-403 (2009)
McManis, Charles R. and Eul Soo Seo. The interface of
open source and proprietary agricultural innovation: facilitated
access and benefit-sharing under the new FAO treaty. 30 Wash. U.
J.L. & Pol’y 405-464 (2009).
Lightbourne, Muriel. The FAO Multilateral System for
plant genetic resources for food and agriculture” better
than bilateralism? 30 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 465-507
(2009).
Symposium. Perspectives on Patents and Patients: Can
They Coexist? 18 Annals Health L. 155-309 (2009).
Ho, Cynthia M. and student Ann Weilbaecher. Patents
versus patients: must we choose? 18 Annals Health L. i-xv
(2009).
Love, James and Tim Hubbard. Prizes for innovation of
new medicines and vaccines. 18 Annals Health L. 155-186
(2009).
Herder, Matthew. Patents & the progress of
personalized medicine: biomarkers research as lens. 18 Annals
Health L. 187-229 (2009).
Tomasson, Michael, M.D. Legal, ethical, and
conceptual bottlenecks to the development of useful genomic tests.
18 Annals Health L. 231-260 (2009).
Martin, Alice O. and Sendil K. Devadas. Patents with
an “I” = patients. 18 Annals Health L. 261-280
(2009).
Weilbaecher, Ann. Comment. Diseases endemic in
developing countries: how to incentivize innovation. 18 Annals
Health L. 281-309 (2009).
October 2009
Chen, Shun-ling. To surpass or to
conform--what are public licenses for? 2009 U. Ill. J.L. Tech.
& Pol’y 107-139
Coblenz, Michael. Not for
entertainment only: fair use and fiction as social commentary. 16
UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 265-321 (2009).
Devlin, Alan, Michael Jacobs and Bruno
Peixoto. Success, dominance, and interoperability. 84 Ind. L.J.
1157-1201 (2009)
Duffy, John F. Are administrative
patent judges unconstitutional? 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 904-923
(2009).
Foster, Sharon E. Invitation to a
discourse regarding the history, philosophy and social psychology
of a property right in copyright. 21 Fla. J. Int’l L.
171-208 (2009).
Keane, Megan. Patent reexamination
and the Seventh Amendment. 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1101-1113
(2009).
Halpern, Sheldon W. Trafficking in
trademarks: setting boundaries for the uneasy relationship between
“property rights” and trademark and publicity rights.
58 DePaul L. Rev. 1013-1045 (2009).
Herlihy, Eileen M. Appellate review
of patent claim construction: should the Federal Circuit be its
own lexographer in matters related to the Seventh Amendment? 15
Mich. Telecomm. & Tech. L. Rev. 469-515 (2009).
Keyhani, Dariush. Patent law in the
global economy: a modest proposal for U.S. patent law and
infringement without borders. 54 Vill. L. Rev. 291-307
(2009).
Pulsinelli, Gary. Harry Potter and
the (re)order of the artists: are we Muggles or goblins? 87 Or.
L. Rev. 1101-1132 (2008)
Rogoyski, Robert S. and Kenneth
Basin. The bloody case that started from a parody: American
intellectual property and the pursuit of democratic ideals in
modern China. 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 237-264 (2009).
Sag, Matthew, Tonja Jacobi and Maxim
Sytch. Ideology and exceptionalism in intellectual property: an
empirical study. 97 Cal. L. Rev. 801-856 (2009).
Schanz, Stephen J. Entrepreneurial
options for protecting intellectual property. 4 Entrepren. Bus.
L.J. 61-77 (2009).
Tricker, Brandy. Taming the Wild
West: solving virtual world disputes using non-virtual law. 35
Rutgers Computer & Tech. L.J. 138-162 (2008).
Wanat, Daniel E. Copyright law:
infringement of musical works and the appropriateness of summary
judgment under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 56(c).
39 U. Mem. L. Rev. 1037-1091 (2009).
- Symposium: Invention,
Creation, & Public Policy Symposium. 34 J. Corp. L. 991-1289
(2009).
Drassinower, Abraham. From
distribution to dialogue: remarks on the concept of balance in
copyright law. 34 J. Corp. L. 991-1007 (2009).
Heymann, Laura A. A tale of (at
least) two authors: focusing copyright law on process over
product. 34 J. Corp. L. 1009-1032 (2009).
Reese, R. Anthony. Photographs of
public domain paintings: how, if at all, should we protect them?
34 J. Corp. L. 1033-1058 (2009).
Stadler, Sara K. Relevant markets for
copyrighted works. 34 J. Corp. L. 1059-1082 (2009).
Collins, Kevin Emerson. Enabling
after-arising technology. 34 J. Corp. L. 1083-1126
(2009).
Cotropia, Christopher A. Describing
patents as real options. 34 J. Corp. L. 1127-1149
(2009).
Cotter, Thomas F. Patent holdup,
patent remedies, and antitrust responses. 34 J. Corp. L. 1151-1207
(2009).
Ghosh, Shubha. Carte blanche,
Quanta, and competition policy. 34 J. Corp. L. 1209-1242
(2009).
Hovenkamp, Herbert. Patents,
property, and competition policy. 34 J. Corp. L. 1243-1258
(2009).
Leslie, Christopher R. Antitrust and
patent law as component parts of innovation policy. 34 J. Corp. L.
1259-1289 (2009).
The Foundations of Intellectual
Property Reform. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1541-2232 (2009).
Abramowicz, Michael and John F. Diffy. Ending the
patenting monopoly. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1541-1611 (2009).
Abrams, David S. Did TRIPS spur
innovation? An analysis of patent duration and incentives to
innovate. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1613-1647 (2009).
Bar-Gill, Oren and Gideon
Parchomovsky. Law and the boundaries of technology-intensive
firms. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1649-1689 (2009).
Barnett, Jonathan M. Is intellectual
property trivial? 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1691-1742 (2009).
Burk, Dan L. and Mark A. Lemley.
Fence posts or sign posts? Rethinking patent claim construction.
157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1743-1799 (2009).
Conley, John P. and Christopher S.
Yoo. Nonrivalry and price discrimination in copyright economics.
157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1801-1830 (2009).
Depoorter, Ben. Technology and
uncertainty: the shaping effect on copyright law. 157 U. Pa. L.
Rev. 1831-1868 (2009).
Hetcher, Steven A. Using social norms
to regulate fan fiction and remix culture. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev.
1869-1935 (2009).
Kieff, F. Scott. The case for
preferring patent-validity litigation over second-window review and
gold-plated patents: when one size doesn’t fit all, how
could two do the trick? 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1937-1963
(2009).
Long, Clarisa. The PTO and the market
for influence in patent law. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1965-1999
(2009).
Mossoff, Adam. The use and abuse of
IP at the birth of the administrative state. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev.
2001-2050 (2009).
Rai, Arti K. Growing pains in the
administrative state: the Patent Office’s troubled quest for
managerial control. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2051-2081 (2009).
Smith, Henry E. Institutions and
indirectness in intellectual property. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev.
2083-2133 (2009).
Wagner, R. Polk. Understanding
patent-quality mechanisms. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2135-2173
(2009).
Simon, Ariel. Reinventing discovery:
patent law’s characterizations of and interventions upon
science. 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2175-2232 (2009).
September 2009
Cormier, Joseph W., Richard Kozell and
Jessica L. McCurdy. Intellectual property crimes. 46 Am. Crim. L.
Rev. 761-812 (2009).
Finney, George. The evolution of
GPLv3 and contributor agreements in open source software. 14 J.
Tech. L. & Pol’y 79-105 (2009).
Gervais, Daniel. Traditional
knowledge: are we closer to the answer(s)? The potential role of
geographical indications. 15 ILSA J. Int’l & Comp. L.
551-567 (2009).
Goldman, Eric. Brand spillovers. 22
Harv. J.L. & Tech. 381-419 (2009).
Grimmelmann, James. Saving Facebook.
94 Iowa L. Rev. 1137-1206 (2009).
Kumar, Sapna. The other patent
agency: congressional regulation of the ITC. 61 Fla. L. Rev.
529-580 (2009).
Lee, Edward. Decoding the DMCA safe
harbors. 32 Colum. J.L. & Arts 233-269 (2009).
Norvell, Blake Covington. The modern
First Amendment and copyright law. 18 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J.
547-588 (2009).
Leitner, John. A legal and cultural
comparison of file-sharing disputes in Japan and the Republic of
Korea and implications for future cyber-regulation. 22 Colum. J.
Asian L. 1-55 (2008).
Manta, Irina D. Privatizing
trademarks. 51 Ariz. L. Rev. 381-425 (2009).
Maybarduk, Peter and Sarah
Rimmington. Compulsory licenses: a tool to improve global access
to the HPV vaccine? 35 Am. J.L. & Med. 323-350
(2009).
Moffat, Viva R. Regulating search.
22 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 475-513 (2009).
Mossoff, Adam. Exclusion and
exclusive use in patent law. 22 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 321-379
(2009).
Norvell, Blake Covington. The modern
First Amendment and copyright law. 18 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J.
547-588 (2009).
Packer, Samuel. Embryonic stem cells,
intellectual property, and patents: ethical concerns. 37 Hofstra
L. Rev. 487-515 (2008).
Petherbridge, Lee. Patent law
uniformity? 22 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 421-473 (2009).
Plantinga, Michael E. An amended
doctrine that will silence the NFL: the demise of the existing
fair use doctrine as it relates to uses of digital sports
entertainment media. 14 J. Tech. L. & Pol’y 51-78
(2009).
Roose-Snyder, Beirne and Megan K.
Doyle. The global health licensing program: a new model for
humanitarian licensing at the university level. 35 Am. J.L. &
Med. 281-309 (2009).
Scherer, F.M. The political economy
of patent policy reform in the United States. 7 J. on Telecomm.
& High Tech. L. 167-216 (2009).
Schwabach, Aaron. The Harry Potter
Lexicon and the world of fandom: fan fiction, outsider works,
and copyright. 70 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 387-434 (2009).
Sprigman, Christopher. Copyright and
the rule of reason. 7 J. on Telecomm. & High Tech. L. 317-342
(2009).
Torrance, Andrew W. and Bill
Tomlinson. Patent expertise and the regress of useful arts. 33 S.
Ill. U. L.J. 239-277 (2009).
Yu, Peter K. A tale of two
development agendas. 35 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 465-573
(2009).
Symposium
Virtual Worlds, Social Networks, and
User-Generated Content. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 779-1168
(2009).
Blitz, Marc Jonathan. A First
Amendment for Second Life: what virtual worlds mean for the
law of video games. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 779-821
(2009).
Fairfield, Joshua A.T. The magic
circle. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 823-840 (2009).
Gervais, Daniel. The tangled web of
UGC: making copyright sense of user-generated content. 11 Vand.
J. Ent. & Tech. L. 841-870 (2009).
Ghosh, Shubha. Patenting games:
Baker v. Selden revisited. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L.
871-898 (2009).
Gibbons, Llewellyn Joseph. Law and
the emotive avatar. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 899-920
(2009).
Halbert, Debora. Mass culture and
the culture of the masses: a manifesto for user-generated rights.
11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 921-961 (2009).
Hetcher, Steven A. Hume’s
penguin or, Yochai Benkler and the nature of peer production. 11
Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 963-1000 (2009).
Levin, Avner and Patricia Sánchez
Abril. Two notions of privacy online. 11 Vand. J. Ent. &
Tech. L. 1001-1051 (2009).
LIM, Hannah Yee Fen. Who monitors
the monitor? Virtual world governance and the failure of contract
law remedies in virtual worlds. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L.
1053-1073 (2009).
Wong, Mary W. S.
“Transformative” user-generated content in copyright
law: infringing derivative works or fair use? 11 Vand. J. Ent.
& Tech. L. 1075-1139 (2009).
Woods, Tanya M. Working toward
spontaneous copyright licensing: a simple solution for a complex
problem. 11 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 1141-1168
(2009).
August 2009
Book. [L. Ray Patterson & Hon.
Stanley F. Birch, Jr., A Unified Theory of Copyright.]
Tributes by Craig Joyce and Hon. Stanley F. Birch, Jr.;
Editor’s note by Craig Joyce; bibliography by Craig Joyce and
Christopher M. Thomas. 46 Hous. L. Rev. 215-399 (2009).
Gomulkiewicz, Robert W. The Federal
Circuit’s licensing law jurisprudence: its nature and
influence. 84 Wash. L. Rev. 199-258 (2009).
Greenspoon, Robert P. Is the United
States finally ready for a patent small claims court? 10 Minn. J.
L. Sci. & Tech. 549-566 (2009).
Heymann, Laura A. The public’s
domain in trademark law: a First Amendment theory of the
consumer. 43 Ga. L. Rev. 651-715 (2009).
Mtima, Lateef. Whom the gods would
destroy: why Congress prioritized copyright protection over
Internet privacy in passing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
61 Rutgers L. Rev. 627-704 (2009).
Osenga, Kristen. Information may want
to be free, but information products do not: protecting and
facilitating transactions in information products. 30 Cardozo L.
Rev. 2099-2145 (2009).
Perzanowski, Aaron K. Rethinking
anticircumvention’s interoperability policy. 42 UC Davis L.
Rev. 1549-1620 (2009).
Samuelson, Pamela. Are patents on
interfaces impeding interoperability? 93 Minn. L. Rev. 1943-2019
(2009).
Symposium:
Frontiers in Empirical Patent Law
Scholarship. 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1321-1698 (2009).
Chin,
Andrew. Introduction. 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1321-1322 (2009).
Plager, Hon. S. Jay. Keynote
address. 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1323-1339 (2009).
Kesan, Jay P. and Andres A. Gallo.
The political economy of the patent system. 87 N.C. L. Rev.
1341-1419 (2009).
Cotropia, Christopher A. and Mark A.
Lemley. Copying in patent law. 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1421-1466
(2009).
Lunney, Glynn S., Jr. Patents and
growth: empirical evidence from the states. 87 N.C. L. Rev.
1467-1517 (2009).
Rai, Arti K., John R. Allison and
Bhaven N. Sampat. University software ownership and litigation: a
first examination. 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1519-1570 (2009).
Chien, Colleen V. Of trolls, Davids,
Goliaths, and kings: narratives and evidence in the litigation of
high-tech patents. 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1571-1616 (2009).
Chin, Andrew. Search for tomorrow:
some side effects of Patent Office automation. 87 N.C. L. Rev.
1617-1656 (2009).
Strandburg, Katherine J., Gábor
Csárdi, Jan Tobochnik, Péter Érdi and Lázló Zalányi. Patent
citation networks revisited: signs of a twenty-first century
change? 87 N.C. L. Rev. 1657-1698 (2009).
|
Blogs featuring IP Section
Members
Info/Law
43(b)log
Technology and Marketing Law
Blog
scrawford.net
discourse.net
madisonian.net
Carrollogos
Legal Theory Blog
Antitrust
and Competition Policy Blog
Holman's Biotech IP
Blog
Patently-O

Email lists of interest to IP
Section Members
IPProfs
(contact Tom Field, Franklin
Pierce Law Center)
Cyberprof
(contact Mark
Lemley, Stanford University)
IPandBiotech
(contact Robin
Feldman, UC Hastings)
|