Examining the Role of Patent Quality in Large-Scale &quot;Patent War&quot; Litigation

Wael Zohni

doi:10.5771/9783845293097

Zusammenfassung

Obwohl das US-Patentsystem wesentlich daran beteiligt war, Innovationen anzukurbeln, haben seine Effizienz und Effektivität in diesem Bereich nachgelassen. Diese Forschungsarbeit stellt zunächst einen historischen Vergleich an und analysiert die wegweisenden Apple- und Wright-Entscheidungen, um zu zeigen dass, ungeachtet des Zeitpunkts, die Vorteile eines Patentsystems wesentlich davon abhängen, wie gut es die „Patentqualität“ definiert und erhält. Ein großer Teil der Herausforderung bei der Erhaltung einer solchen Qualität bezieht sich auf die subjektive und oft unklare Beschaffenheit von Inventionskriterien wie „Nichtnaheliegen“. Wie aktuelle Trends zeigen, führt eine verminderte Patentqualität zu größerer Unklarheit über die Patentgültigkeit, was wiederum mehr Rechtsstreitigkeiten hervorruft. Das Werk schlägt vor dass, um die Konstanz der Patentqualität zu verbessern, das US-Patentamt die ursprünglich von den Gründervätern der USA erdachten Strategien beachten und so ein Patentanmeldungssystem, das den Nutzen und die öffentliche Prüfung beim Patenterteilungsverfahren hervorhebt, schaffen sollte. Moderne Informationstechnologie kann nun genutzt werden, um diesen ursprünglichen Rahmen für Patentqualitätskontrollsysteme effektiv wiederherzustellen.

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr: 2018
ISBN-Print: 978-3-8487-5107-5
ISBN-Online: 978-3-8452-9309-7
Verlag: Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe: Munich Intellectual Property Law Center - MIPLC Studies
Band: 31
Sprache: Englisch
Seiten: 78
Produkttyp: Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten

Titelei/InhaltsverzeichnisSeiten 1 - 12 Download Kapitel (PDF)
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. The Patent Wars
2. B. Purpose of Comparison
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. Overview
2. B. Pre-Constitutional Setting
3. C. House Resolution 10 (H.R. 10)
4. D. Patent Acts of 1790 and 1793
5. E. The “Registration Years:” 1793 through 1836
6. F. Summary
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. Introduction
2. B. Congressional Review of USPTO Performance
3. C. 2016 GAO Report Findings
4. D. Analysis and Summary
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. 1. 1. iPhone vs. Galaxy
  2. 2. Patent Litigation
2. 1. 1. Patent Battles, Product War
  2. 2. Section 289 Damages
3. 1. 1. Colossal Legal War
  2. 2. Invention vs. “Cool” Product
  3. 3. Questionable Patents
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. Background
2. B. Analysis
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. Drift from Historical Basis
2. B. Long-standing Patent Quality Concerns
3. C. Unwritten Rule on Utility
4. D. Comparing Apple and Wright Cases
5. E. Net Challenges
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. The “Utility Parameter”
2. 1. 1. Description
  2. 2. Compatibility with Existing Systems
  3. 3. Agency Examination Option
  4. 4. Benefits
  5. 5. Risks and Unknowns
  6. 6. Summary
Download Kapitel (PDF)
1. A. Revisiting Apple and Wright
2. B. Looking Ahead
List of Works CitedSeiten 75 - 78 Download Kapitel (PDF)

Literaturverzeichnis (41 Einträge)

O’REGAN, G., PILLARS OF COMPUTING: A COMPENDIUM OF SELECT, PIVOTAL Google Scholar öffnen
TECHNOLOGY FIRMS (2015) Google Scholar öffnen
BOTTOMLEY, SEAN, THE BRITISH SYSTEM DURING THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 1700-1852, 28 CAMBRIDGE IP AND INFORMATION LAW 53 (2014) Google Scholar öffnen
Goldstone, Lawrence, Birdmen: The Wright Brothers’, Glenn Curtiss, and the Battle to Control the Skies (2014) Google Scholar öffnen
Bessen, James & Meurer, Michael J., Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk (2008) Google Scholar öffnen
BOLDRIN, MICHELE & LEVINE, DAVID K., AGAINST INTELLECTUAL MONOPOLY, (dklevine.com 2004) Google Scholar öffnen
Walterscheid, Edward C., To Promote the Progress of Useful Arts: American Patent Law and Administration, 1798-1836 (1998) Google Scholar öffnen
Dobyns, Kenneth W., The Patent Office Pony: A History of the Early Patent Office (1997) Google Scholar öffnen
GORDON, THOMAS T. et al., PATENT FUNDAMENTALS FOR SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS, 7 (3d ed. 1995), https://books.google.de Google Scholar öffnen
Periodicals: Google Scholar öffnen
Yelderman, Stephen, Do Patent Challenges Increase Competition?, 83 4, THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW Review pg, (2016) Google Scholar öffnen
Diamond, Arthur M., Seeking the Patent Truth: Patents Can Provide Justice and Funding for Inventors, 19 N.3 The Independent Review 325, (2015) Google Scholar öffnen
Graham, Stuart & Vishnubhakat, Saurabh, Of Smart Phone Wars and Software, 27, AMERICAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION 67, (Winter 2013) Google Scholar öffnen
Chia, Thomas H., Fighting the Smartphone Patent War with RAND-Encumbered Patents, 27 BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL 209, (2012) Google Scholar öffnen
Worrel, Rodney K., The Wrights Brothers’ Pioneer Patent, 65 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION JOURNAL 1513, 15XX (1979) Google Scholar öffnen
Articles: Google Scholar öffnen
Eichenwald, Kurt, The Great Smartphone War, VANITY FAIR (May 2014), https://www.vanityfair.com/news/business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-patent-war (Aug 29, 2017) Google Scholar öffnen
Crum, Rex, Supreme Court throws out Apple’s $399M win in Samsung patent fight, MERCURY NEWS (Dec. 2016), http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/06/supreme-court-throws-out-apples-399m-win-in-samsung-patent-fight/ Google Scholar öffnen
Whittemore, Lauren E., U.S. Government Accountability Office Releases Two Reports on the United States Patent and Trademark Office and a Survey of USPTO Examiners, FENWICK AND WEST LLP (Aug 2016), http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b49734c2-6e59-4970-8354-8b3ff5e0d853 Google Scholar öffnen
Davis, Ryan, GAO Says Time Pressure At USPTO Leading To Poor Patents, LAW360 (July 2016) https://www.law360.com/articles/819570 Google Scholar öffnen
Rein, Lisa, Patent Lawsuits Swell and Watchdog Says the Government is to Blame, WASHINGTON POST, (July 2016), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/07/20/patent-officetktk/?utm_term=.be6d9769eecb Google Scholar öffnen
Broussard, Mitchel, Apple Loses Appeal in Samsung Case: Two Patents Ruled Invalid, $120 Million Verdict Overturned, MACRUMORS (Feb. 2016), https://www.macrumors.com/2016/02/26/apple-samsung-appeal/ Google Scholar öffnen
Mullin, Joe Apple’s $120M jury verdict against Samsung destroyed on appeal, ARSTECHNICA (Feb. 2016), https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/02/appeals-court-reverses-apple-v-samsung-ii-strips-away-apples-120m-jury-verdict/ Google Scholar öffnen
Trainor, Sean The Wright Brothers: Pioneers of Patent Trolling, Time (Dec. 2015), http://time.com/4143574/wright-brothers-patent-trolling/ Google Scholar öffnen
Oatman-Stanford, Hunter, Let There Be Light Bulbs: How Incandescents Became the Icons of Innovation, COLLECTOR’S WEEKLY (July 2015) https://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/let-there-be-light-bulbs/ Google Scholar öffnen
Matt Levy, Yes, The Aviation Industry Was Nearly Derailed by the Wright Brothers’ Patent, PATENT PROGRESS (Jan 2015), https://www.patentprogress.org/2015/01/12/yes-aviation-industry-nearly-derailed-wright-brothers-patent/ Google Scholar öffnen
Nocera, Joe Greed and the Wright Brothers, NY TIMES (Aug 2014), https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/19/opinion/nocera-greed-and-the-wright-brothers.html?_r=2 Google Scholar öffnen
Tibken, Shara Apple v. Samsung patent trial recap: How it all turned out, CNET (2014), https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-v-samsung-patent-trial-recap-how-it-all-turned-out-faq/ Google Scholar öffnen
Von Florian Mueller, Eingestellt , Apple, Samsung provide final list of patents and accused products for California spring trial, FOSS PATENTS (Feb. 2014), http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/02/apple-samsung-provide-final-list-of.html Google Scholar öffnen
Hendricks, Drew, 7 Simple Ways You Can Protect Your Idea From Theft, FORBES (Nov. 2013), https://www.forbes.com/sites/drewhendricks/2013/11/18/7-simple-ways-you-can-protect-your-idea-from-theft/#7af8b02b1f86 Google Scholar öffnen
Mauro, Charles Apple v. Samsung: Impact and Implications for Product Design, User Interface Design (UX), Software Development and the Future of High-Technology Consumer Products, PULSEUX BLOG (Dec 2012), http://www.mauronewmedia.com/blog/apple-v-samsung-implications-for-product-design-user-interface-ux-design-software-development-and-the-future-of-high-technology-consumer-products/ Google Scholar öffnen
Grosse Ruse-Khan, Henning, Options Within the IP System to Promote Minor Innovations, WIPO Regional Seminar (Sep 2012), MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COMPETITION LAW, http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/aspac/en/wipo_ip_kul_12/wipo_ip_kul_12_ref_t4b.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
Kravets, David Who Cheated Whom? Apple v. Samsung Patent Showdown Explained, WIRED (July 2012), https://www.wired.com/2012/07/apple-v-samsung-explained/ Google Scholar öffnen
Posner, Richard A. Why There Are Too Many Patents in America, THE ATLANTIC (July 2012), https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/07/why-there-are-too-many-patents-in-america/259725/ Google Scholar öffnen
History.com staff, The Continental Congress, (2010) HISTORY.COM, http://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/the-continental-congress Google Scholar öffnen
Quinn, Gene, An Old Patent Examiner Explains Poor Patent Quality, IPWATCHDOG (Aug 2009), http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/04/17/an-old-patent-examiner-explains-poor-patent-quality/id=2651/ Google Scholar öffnen
Lichtman, Doug and Lemley, Mark A., Rethinking Patent Law’s Presumption of Validity, STANFORD LAW REVIEW (Aug 2007), https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark_Lemley/publication/228188392_Rethinking_Patent_Law's_Presumption_of_Validity/links/02e7e51eaa79346c23000000.pdf Google Scholar öffnen
Hise, Phaedra, How the Wright Brothers Blew It, FORBES (Nov 2003), https://www.forbes.com/2003/11/19/1119aviation.html Google Scholar öffnen
Price, Jr., William, Reasons Behind the Revolutionary War, Tar Heel Junior Historian Association, NC Museum of History (1992) taken from NCMEDIA, http://www.ncpedia.org/history/usrevolution/reasons Google Scholar öffnen
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, Wilbur and Orville Wright Papers at the Library of Congress, 1901 to 1910, https://www.loc.gov/collections/wilbur-and-orville-wright-papers/articles-and-essays/the-wilbur-and-orville-wright-timeline-1846-to-1948/1901-to-1910/ Google Scholar öffnen
Cornell Law School, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/intellectual_property_clause Google Scholar öffnen