scholarly journals Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age: 2016 - Chapters 1 and 2

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
Digital Copyright ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Right ◽  
Trade Secret Protection

Rapid advances in digital and life sciences technology continue to spur theevolution of intellectual property law. As professors and practitioners inthis field know all too well, Congress and the courts continue to developintellectual property law and jurisprudence at a rapid pace. For thatreason, we have significantly augmented and revised "Intellectual Propertyin the New Technological Age.The 2016 Edition reflects the following principal developments:● Trade Secrets: Congress passed the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, oneof the most momentous changes in the history of trade secret protection. Thenew law opens up the federal courts to trade secret cases, provides for exparte seizures of misappropriated trade secrets in “extraordinarycircumstances,” and establishes immunity for whistleblowers.● Patents: The past several years have witnessed some of the mostsignificant developments in U.S. patent history — from the establishment ofthe new administrative review proceedings at the Patent Office to importantshifts in patent-eligibility, claim indefiniteness, and enhanced damages atthe Supreme Court and means-plus-function claim interpretation andinfringement doctrine at the Federal Circuit. We have restructured thepatent chapter to illuminate these areas. We have also significantlyexpanded coverage of design patents in response to the growing importanceof this form of protection.● Copyrights: The Supreme Court issued important decisions addressing thepublic performance right and the first sale doctrine. The past few yearsalso witnessed important developments in the Online Service Provider safeharbor, fair use, and state protection for pre-1972 sound recordings. Wehave also integrated the digital copyright materials into a unifiedtreatment of copyright law and substantially revamped the fair use sectionto reflect the broadening landscape of this important doctrine.● Trademarks: We have integrated important cases on federal registrabilityof disparaging marks, merchandising rights, likelihood of confusion on theInternet, and remedies.● Other State Protections: We have updated material on the right ofpublicity, an active and growing area. We have also reorganized the chapterand focused it on IP regimes.

Summary of Results

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Kuenzler
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
Networked Economy

The persuasive force of the accepted account’s property logic has driven antitrust and intellectual property law jurisprudence for at least the past three decades. It has been through the theory of trademark ownership and the commercial strategy of branding that these laws led the courts to comprehend markets as fundamentally bifurcated—as operating according to discrete types of interbrand and intrabrand competition—a division that had an effect far beyond the confines of trademark law and resonates today in the way government agencies and courts evaluate the emerging challenges of the networked economy along the previously introduced distinction between intertype and intratype competition. While the government in its appeal to the Supreme Court in ...

Hedging (into) Property?—Invisible Trade Secrets and International Trade in Goods

2021 ◽  
pp. 106-128
Author(s):  
Nari Lee
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Balance Of Interests ◽  
The Law ◽  
Trade Secret Protection

Trade secrets can encompass all forms of intellectual property subject matter, as well as other types of data, information, and knowledge that may not meet the threshold of eligibility for intellectual property rights. Trade secret protection may be used to prolong existing exclusivity or to hedge the balance of interests that the law aims to seek through restrictions to such exclusivity. Against this backdrop, this chapter asks whether, and to what extent, the law of trade secrets can be used privately to create a regime of property rules in an age of digitised trading, using the recently adopted EU Directive on trade secrets as an example. It asks whether the forms of protection and enforcement required under the EU Directive make it a de facto property right, hedging a liability regime into a proprietary regime, which is created unilaterally by ensuring secrecy and by imposing a duty of confidence.

scholarly journals Trade Secrets 101

2008 ◽  
Vol 130 (10) ◽  
pp. 36-38
Author(s):  
Kirk Tesk
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
General Definition ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
Positive Aspect ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Engineering Managers ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
High Level ◽  
Trade Secret Protection

This article focuses on advantages to protect intellectual property by keeping it under wraps. There are some things that just cannot keep from getting out. Probably nothing in the law breeds as many myths as trade secrets. One positive aspect of trade secrets is that they can protect things patents cannot, since the general definition of a trade secret is any information that is in some way valuable, provided that reasonable efforts are used to maintain the secret. Trade secret protection can also last indefinitely. Patents, by contrast, expire 20 years after they are filed. The problem with trade secrets begins when engineering managers rely on trade secrets without understanding their limits or use trade secrets as a fall-back business decision. Conducting regular trade secret audits is a mechanism where a trade secret specialist gains an understanding of a company’s secrets, ensures that they are sufficiently defined, and that they are adequately protected. After the product is released, its high-level functionality is no longer a trade secret, but could be protected via a patent. Marketing literature and data sheets are also no longer trade secrets because they are usually made public.

scholarly journals BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW DISPUTES

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (40) ◽  
Author(s):  
Njegoslav Jović
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Property Law ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Primary Activity ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
The Right

In this paper, the author analyzes the benefits and limitationsof international arbitration in disputes that are subject to intellectual propertyrights. Intellectual property law disputes have special characteristics. In theevent of a dispute with an international element, there is a problem with thejurisdiction of state courts due to the principle of the territoriality of intellectualproperty rights. The titular of the right must initiate court proceedings in allcountries individually, leading to delays in procedures, multiplication of costsand uneven judicial practice. For these reasons, the author analyzes alternativedispute resolution through arbitration to determine whether this method ofdispute resolution is more acceptable to foreign courts.The author particularly pays attention to the WIPO Center for Arbitrationand Mediation as a permanent arbitration institution whose primary activity isthe resolution of disputes in the field of intellectual property rights.

23. Trade Secrets

2019 ◽  
pp. 513-522
Author(s):  
Justine Pila ◽  
Paul L.C. Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Know How ◽  
Business Information ◽  
Minimal Form ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Trade Secret Protection

This chapter deals with the legal protection of trade secrets. Traditionally, trade secret protection was left to the national laws of Member States. These national regimes are rooted firmly in existing legal rules in the areas of unfair competition, tort, or breach of confidence. And there is also the “Directive on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use, and disclosure”. The Directive seeks to impose on Member States a minimal form of harmonization and uniformity. It does not impose a (Community) right in relation to a trade secret, but it works with a common basic definition of a trade secret, the principle that there needs to be redress for the unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure of a trade secret, and a catalogue of measures and remedies.

What nanotech inventors need to know about trade secrets and the prior user rights defense

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chinh H. Pham ◽  
Ross Spencer Garsson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
The World ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
The Many

AbstractThe America Invents Act (AIA) presents new challenges and strategy considerations for nanotechnology inventors and companies that seek to protect their intellectual property in the United States. Among the many notable changes, the AIA expands the “prior user rights” defense to infringement and broadens the classes of patents that are eligible for the new limited prior user rights defense. While this defense is limited in some instances, such as against universities, it could be invaluable in others, such as when a competitor independently discovers and patents the trade secret. In the world of nanotechnology, where inventions and products are increasingly complex, this protection can prove to be vitally important.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document