Comment of the Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, on the U.S. Antitrust Agenciess Proposed Update of the Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koren W. Wong-Ervin ◽  
Bruce H. Kobayashi



2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila Ringeling ◽  
Joshua D. Wright ◽  
Douglas H. Ginsburg ◽  
John M. Yun ◽  
Tad Lipsky


2002 ◽  
Vol 28 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 179-213
Author(s):  
Maxwell J. Mehlman ◽  
Kirsten M. Rabe

Imagine a world in which parents can genetically enhance their child's height so that he becomes a professional basketball player. Or imagine a law school student preparing for the bar who takes out an extra loan to genetically enhance his intelligence. What if going to your physician for a routine physical included the option of genetically enhancing any trait you desired? And what if such a practice was expensive and, therefore, only available to the privileged members of society? Is this desirable or should the U.S. government ban genetic enhancement? What if the government bans it and citizens travel abroad to receive genetic enhancement treatments? Can the U.S. government do anything to prevent access to illegal genetic enhancement abroad?



2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff E. Schwartz ◽  
Richard T. Girards ◽  
Karen A. Borrelli

Abstract Engineers, by the practice of their profession, regularly apply new methods and products to the end of solving old problems. These new methods and products may prove to be both commercially useful and financially valuable. The U.S. intellectual property system can afford such innovations broad protection from old fashioned “poaching” by securing for their creators/inventors powerful legal rights to such innovations.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document