scholarly journals Inventing Around Copyright

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Burk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
The Supreme Court

Patent law has long harbored the concept of "inventing around," under which competitors to a patent holder may be expected, and even encouraged, to design their technologies so as to skirt the boundaries defined by patent claims. It has become increasingly clear that, for better or for worse, copyright also fosters inventing around. Copyright is not based on written claims, but because copyright links exclusive rights to technological actions such as reproduction, distribution, or transmission, the language of the copyright statute, and judicial readings of the statute, create boundaries around which potential infringers may technologically navigate. For example, the Aereo case recently decided by the Supreme Court involves technology that was explicitly designed to conform to non-infringing definitions of private transmission found in previous court decisions. But in copyright, unlike patent, there has been little analysis of the tendency to foster alternative technological development. In this paper I draw upon previous analyses of inventing around in patent law to assess the benefits and detriments of inventing around in copyright.

scholarly journals Life After Bilski

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Real World ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
District Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Circuit ◽  
Abstract Ideas ◽  
New Applications

In Bilski v. Kappos, the Supreme Court declined calls to categoricallyexclude business methods - or any technology - from the patent law. It alsorejected as the sole test of subject matter eligibility the FederalCircuit’s deeply-flawed "machine or transformation" test, under which noprocess is patentable unless it is tied to a particular machine ortransforms an article to another state or thing. Subsequent developmentsthreaten to undo that holding, however. Relying on the Court’s descriptionof the Federal Circuit test as a "useful and important clue', the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office, patent litigants, and district courts have allcontinued to rely on the machine-or-transformation test in the wake ofBilski: no longer as the sole rule, but as a presumptive starting pointthat threatens to effectively become mandatory. In this Article, we suggesta new way to understand the exclusion of abstract ideas from patentablesubject matter. No class of invention is inherently too abstract forpatenting. Rather, the rule against patenting abstract ideas is an effortto prevent inventors from claiming their ideas too broadly. By requiringthat patent claims be limited to a specific set of practical applicationsof an idea, the abstract ideas doctrine both makes the scope of theresulting patent clearer and leaves room for subsequent inventors toimprove upon - and patent new applications of - the same basic principle.Recasting the abstract ideas doctrine as an overclaiming test eliminatesthe constraints of the artificial machine-or-transformation test, as wellas the pointless effort to fit inventions into permissible or impermissiblecategories. It also helps understand some otherwise-inexplicabledistinctions in the case law. Testing for overclaiming allows courts tofocus on what really matters: whether the scope of the patentee's claimsare commensurate with the invention’s practical, real-world contribution.This inquiry, we suggest, is the touchstone of the abstract ideas analysis,and the way out of the post-Bilski confusion.

22. A Revolution by Due Process of Law?

2021 ◽  
pp. 613-648
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Due Process Of Law

This chapter analyses the conduct and constitutional implications of the United Kingdom’s proposed withdrawal from the European Union. The chapter begins by examining the legal basis, conduct, and result of the withdrawal referendum. The chapter then assesses the High Court and Supreme Court decisions in the first of the two Miller judgments. It continues with a discussion on the extreme positions of ‘hard brexit’ and ‘soft brexit’ and the assesses the significance of the results of the unexpected 2017 general election. The chapter goes on to examine the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and the subsequent fall of the May government and its replacement by an administration led by Boris Johnson. In the final part of the chapter the Miller (No 2) and Cherry litigation and its political aftermath are discussed in full, with a particular focus laid on the controversial way in which the Supreme Court deployed the notion of ‘justiciability’ in its judgment in Miller (No 2).

scholarly journals Le droit de recours de l'entrepreneur contre l'ingénieur ou l'architecte à la lumière d'arrêts récents de la Cour suprême

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 625-638
Author(s):  
Thérèse Rousseau-Houle
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Relationship

This paper surveys recent Supreme Court decisions dealing with the relationship between building contractors and architects or engineers participating in the same project. Normally, the agreement between the owner and the architect or the owner and the engineer vests no rights in the building contractor. The latter may only sue the architect or the engineer on an extra-contractual basis. Proceedings may then take the form of a recursory action, where the contractor, having been held jointly and severally liable towards the owner, attempts to have the architect or engineer take their share of liability. Alternatively, proceedings could be taken on the basis of a delict, in cases where negligence is alleged by the contractor against the architect or engineer. The Supreme Court seems inclined to view the problem from a contract perspective, and to restrict opportunities to sue on the basis of a delict.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI TUGAS HAKIM PENGAWAS DAN PENGAMAT DALAM PENGAWASAN DAN PENGAMATAN TERHADAP NARAPIDANA (Kajian di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Klas II A Purwokerto)

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dessy Perdani Yuris PS
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Internal Resistance ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court

The implementation of court judgments needs to be observed and perceived, thus the birth of Supervisor and Observer Judge Institution by Law No. 8 of 1981. The position of a Judge is not simply responsible for imposition of punishment, but also have to responsible for completion of punishment term by inmates in Correctional Institute by appropriate pattern and program of counseling. Besides in article 277 KUHAP till article 288 KUHAP it is charged another task as supervisor and observer of the court decision. The research results show that the implementation of the Supervisory Judge task and Observers in the execution of court decisions in Purwokerto Penitentiary is based on the Criminal Procedure Code Article 277 through Article 283 Criminal Procedure Code, the implementing regulations of the Supreme Court Circular No. RI. No. 7 of 1985. Supervisory Judge in the performance of duties and Observers in Purwokerto Penitentiary still met the constraints that are internal or external, internal resistance from law enforcement and the factors of factor means or facilities. Then the external barriers are the ruling factor.Keywords : Supervisor and Observer Judge, Purwokerto Penitentiary and prisoner

scholarly journals Connecting Supreme Court Decisions, Media Coverage, and Public Opinion: The Case of Lawrence v. Texas

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 209-230
Author(s):  
Mahalley D. Allen ◽  
Donald P. Haider-Markel
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Gay And Lesbian ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Media ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Relationship

Many scholars have examined the relationship between public opinion and the U.S. Supreme Court, but most researchers have often failed to take into account the fact that the press mediates this relationship. Due to the public’s lack of independent knowledge about Supreme Court decisions, the media has the potential to play an influential role in the communication and interpretation of Supreme Court decisions. In this article, we examine the relationship between the Supreme Court, the media, and public opinion. First, we examine whether increased public tolerance on gay and lesbian issues has resulted in increased media coverage of gay-related cases before the Supreme Court. Second, we examine how media coverage of the Court’s 2003 decision to strike down state sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas may have been associated with decreased public support for gay and lesbian civil rights. Our analysis suggests that increased support for gay and lesbian civil rights may have lead to increased media attention to the Lawrence case and that the tone of this coverage may have subsequently resulted in an observed decrease in support for gay and lesbian civil rights following the Court’s decision. We also suggest that the release of a highly critical dissenting opinion by the Court in the case may have encouraged negative media coverage and the resulting shift in public opinion. Our research has broad implications for media coverage of Supreme Court decisions.

scholarly journals ВПЛИВ СУДОВОЇ ПРАКТИКИ ВЕРХОВНОГО СУДУ УКРАЇНИ НА СИСТЕМУ ДЖЕРЕЛ ЦИВІЛЬНОГО ТА ЦИВІЛЬНО-ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНОГО ПРАВА УКРАЇНИ

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 245-256
Author(s):  
А. І. Дрішлюк
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Author Position ◽  
Research Author

Наукова стаття присвячена визначенню значення рішень Верховного Суду України, прийнятих за результатами розгляду заяв про перегляд судових рішень з мотивів неод­накового застосування судом (судами) касаційної інстанції одних і тих самих норм ма­теріального права в аналогічних правовідносинах, порядку і її вплив на систему джерел цивільного і цивільно-процесуального права, після законодавчого закріплення обов'язко­вості рішень Верховного Суду України для всіх суб'єктів владних повноважень (суб'єктів правозастосовчої діяльності). На підставі проведеного дослідження сформульована авторська позиція щодо систе­ми джерел цивільного права, судової практики, а також впливу останньої на трансфор­мацію системи джерел цивільного та процесуального права України на сучасному етапі її розвитку.   The scientific article is sanctified to determination of value of decisions of the Supreme court of Ukraine, statements accepted on results consideration about the revision of court decisions on reasons of different application by the court (by courts) of appeal instance of one the same norms of material right in analogical legal relationships, order and her influence on the system of sources civil and civil judicial law of Ukraine, after legislative fixing of obligatoryness of decisions of the Supreme court of Ukraine for all the subjects of imperious plenary powers (subjects of law using activity). On the basis of the conducted research author position is formulated in regard to the system of sources civil law, judicial practice, and also the influence of the last on transformation the system of sources civil and civil judicial law of Ukraine on the modern stage of its development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document