According to the World Bank, gross domestic product in the U.S. was almost $16.8 trillion in 2013.
As it prepares to launch its new “quality initiative,” the USPTO claims that IP-intensive industries “support at least 40 million jobs in the U.S. and contribute more than $5 trillion—or nearly 35 percent—to our GDP.”
Intellectual Asset Management is today reporting on its blog on subjects near and dear to all of us: IP value, software patents in our “tricky” new era, legislation that could affect litigation, the environment post-Alice, and more.
Most interesting to me were the reports from Joff Wild, including on what Rockstar Consortium’s John Veschi said about software patents at SCOTUS:
This last year has brought a lot of changes.
In July of 2014, I moved to Katten Muchin Rosenman, to lead its national patent litigation practice. Terrific firm, a great practice group, and lots of room to grow. (I’m here.)
Last month, I finished my MBA at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. What a journey that has been! It was truly a pleasure to work with a cohort of smart, highly focused business people and professors. Perspective is everything—and it’s vital for lawyers: I now think quite differently about my work for clients—and about the importance of innovation.
Remember your Mom saying “imitation is the greatest form of flattery”? And thinking as a kid … “Right, Mom.” I do remember, and now I find opportunity to say it to my girls.
But what’s the proper way to imitate something that you like? From a legal perspective, we know to avoid other companies’ intellectual property. We strategize about ways to “design around,” to avoid infringing others’ IP. But can we legitimately imitate?
IP drives our economy. And now more than ever, when we send overseas everything we manufacture or sell, we need a strong IP system to protect innovators and their products (and services).
Yet, it seems that at every turn, some governmental entity is trying to weaken our ability to do so. Congress, the President, various states’ attorneys general, etc. Why is that?
What is the business of the Federal Circuit? What should it be? And how do decisions at the CAFC—and wider developments in patent law—affect America’s ability to compete in the global marketplace?
From the day of its inception in October of 1982, the role and rulings of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, a court of limited subject matter jurisdiction but a nationwide reach, have been the subject of much debate.
“My learned lord, we pray you to proceed
And justly and religiously unfold
Why the law Salique that they have in France
Or should, or should not, bar us in our claim….”
Wm. Shakespeare, The Historie of Henry V
At the beginning of Shakespeare’s Henry V, young King Henry is looking for a pretext upon which to invade France.
Alice is in line to get a look in the Supreme Court’s mirror. What will she see?
Long-time commentator Lyle Denniston has just published a short piece on SCOTUSblog.com about what promises to be a critically important patent ruling at the Supreme Court, in Alice Corporation v. CLS Bank International.
