Intellectual Property

This basic economic fact—dynamic development of innovative distribution mechanisms require substantial investment in both people and resources—is what makes commercialization an essential feature of both copyright policy and law (and of all intellectual property doctrines).

IP rights have developed in the same way as property rights in land with both legislatures and courts creating, repealing, and extending doctrines in an important institutional and doctrinal evolution of these property rights securing technological innovation and creative works.

This oft-made contrast by libertarians between so-called “common law property in land” versus “statutory IP” is a myth that has no basis in the reality of how common law property rights in land evolved in England and then in the United States of America.

Weakening intellectual property laws due to negative policy rhetoric, hyperbolic internet commentary, and even extensive lobbying by firms who choose to infringe patents because they don’t want to pay the licenses offered to them by patent licensing firms is irresponsible.

The real problem with this “broken reporting” by Mr. Bilton and his ilk is that it is feeding a growing anti-patent frenzy among commentators, academics, and the public, who seem to think that your smart phones, tablets and other technological marvels just don’t exist because of a so-called “broken patent system” that has stymied software and other high-tech innovation at every turn.

The claim that there is a “patent litigation explosion” is a myth, but there’s a related patent litigation myth that has proven cantankerously resilient in the patent policy debates — there’s an “explosion” of patent-owners racing to the International Trade Commission (ITC) who are obtaining exclusion orders against infringers.

The recent New York Times article on the high-tech industry argues that software patents and the current “smart phone war” are a disaster for innovation, and it backs this with quotes and cites from a horde of academics and judges, like Judge Richard Posner, that...

The New York Times set hearts aflutter in the IP world yesterday with its hit piece on patents in the high-tech industry.

The historical patent litigation rates are significant because they also include the same “patent wars” that we are experiencing with the “smart phone war.”

It’s time to bring objectivity and a historical-based perspective to public policy discussions about software patents and the role of property rights in innovation.

While the United States continues to weaken its patent laws, Singapore is taking a different path.  Singapore has just announced that it is developing a plan to be an Intellectual Property Hub, according to Channelnewsasia.com.  They believe that intellectual property...

The bill H.R. 3059, titled the “Promoting Automotive Repair, Trade, and Sales” (PARTS) Act claims to reduce the cost of automotive repairs by limiting design patents for automotive parts to 30 months.  This bill pits automobile manufacturers against insurance...

Tax Day this year was a great day for old-fashioned patriotism, but a bad day for television journalism--exemplified by CNN "reporter" Susan Roesgen. When hundreds of thousands of protestors raised their voices in opposition to profligate government spending and high...

President Bush recently signed into law the "PRO-IP" bill, an act for "Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property." The purpose of the bill is to enhance remedies for violations of intellectual property laws.The law creates a copyright...

If individuals do have a property right in their own identities, do they not also have a property right in the words and symbols that uniquely identify their products and services?

See if you can guess which stock I'm talking about. This stock topped out in early January at 75. It steadily declined all year, hitting bottom at 49 on Aug. 12. After that, it rallied magnificently. On Monday it was trading at 65. Then something very strange...