Search for: "Mark A. Lemley"
Results 881 - 900
of 1,110
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2017, 1:49 pm
Mark Lemley cites to Vermont in SHOULD PATENT INFRINGEMENT REQUIRE PROOF OF COPYING? [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 1:39 pm
" As Seaman notes, this conflicts with Mark Lemley's argument, as well as the Supreme Court's conclusion in Kewanee, that strong trade secret laws can actually promote patent law's goal of "disclosure" of valuable information that would otherwise be kept secret by permitting firms to encourage free exchange of information using only "reasonable" efforts to maintain secrecy. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 11:56 am
(As Paul Gugliuzza and Mark Lemley have noted, ignoring the Rule 36 decisions can lead to a skewed sense of outcomes because the Fed. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 10:16 pm
"Mark Lemley, IP and Other Regulations. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 6:36 pm
Blue Coat, represented by Mark Lemley, prevailed on the'968 patent matter.From the decision:Blue Coat also argues that it was entitled to JMOL ofnon-infringement with respect to the ’968 patent becauseFinjan failed to introduce substantial evidence that theaccused products implement the claimed “policy index. [read post]
6 May 2013, 9:43 pm
There is an excellent paper on this problem of royalty stacking by Carl Shapiro and Mark Lemley and can be accessed over here. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 11:56 am
This is closely related to my colleague Mark Lemley’s argument in his 2015 article IP in a World Without Scarcity, in which he notes that IP may be less necessary in a world where creation, reproduction, and distribution are cheap. [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 4:30 am
DorfTwo days ago marked what would have been the 93rd birthday of the Rev. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 8:08 am
Relatedly, jumping off what Mark McKenna & Mark Lemley have written, if a false claim was material to some subset of consumers, those consumers would arguably be a relevant submarket.Anyway, plaintiffs were entitled to discovery in order to substantiate their disparagement claims.Unsurprisingly, Lanham Act claims by the competitor plaintiffs also survived. [read post]
3 Feb 2023, 7:23 am
Mark Lemley & Mark McKenna, Breaking the Symmetry Between Utility and Design Patents AKA Design Patents Aren’t Patents (… and it’s a good thing too) Three rules: (1) design patents are judged by patent rules unless statute says otherwise; (2) that which infringes if later anticipates if earlier: there is symmetry b/t infringement and anticipation; (3) infringement in design patent is completely different than infringement in utility patent, which… [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 11:55 am
But I recognize that not all of the signatories are EFF activists or as Google aligned as, for example, Professor Mark Lemley, who supports Google's baseball extortion proposal to resolve FRAND disputes. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 12:35 pm
” [Mark Lemley & Mark McKenna may be interested to see that the court cites an antitrust case noting that when a seller’s product is differentiated, seller has “a little pocket of monopoly power. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 2:02 pm
Mark Lemley: the past expectation was that you went into business using your name, and doing otherwise might be deceptive. [read post]
17 Apr 2010, 3:00 am
Lemley: To rehabilitate utilitarianism: all advantages are comparative. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 12:56 pm
[Could through design patent.]Lemley: internalist justifications ultimately have to fall back on externalist—you need a theory of why © shouldn’t extend too far; he thinks that will ultimately be about why we want other doctrines. [read post]
7 Oct 2007, 7:33 am
Lemley: Touts coming Stanford IP Litigation Clearinghouse, to collect this type of data. [read post]
9 Aug 2011, 6:10 am
" Even on Written Description, a commenter suggested that Professor Mark Lemley is an "academic hack[]" who "may have made this mistake because he does not have the technical background necessary to understand the issues surrounding the invention of the light bulb. [read post]
17 Dec 2015, 7:30 am
Rodríguez-Reyes, Ferraiuoli LLC NOTAS [1] Mark Lemley, The Myth Of The Sole Inventor, Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 1856610 (July 21, 2011); available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 6:01 pm
See Cotropia, Christopher Anthony, Lemley, Mark A. and Sampat, Bhaven N., Do Applicant Patent Citations Matter? [read post]
18 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
Later, Lemley would throw Quillen/Webster under the bus in the rubber-stamp paper, marking the ultimate discreditation of the 97% number. [read post]
