Recent Headlines in the IP World:
- Tom Li: BlackBerry Sells Legacy Patents For $600 Million (Source: IT World Canada)
- Blake Brittain: Apple Wins New Trial in Wireless Patent Case After $85 million Loss (Source: Reuters)
- Samantha Handler: Tillis Mulls ‘One-Stop Shop’ for U.S. Patents, Copyrights (2) (Source: Bloomberg Law)
- Atty. Thomas A. Miller: USPTO Launches Deferred Approach to Section 101 Eligibility Analysis in Patent Prosecution (The National Law Reveiw)
- Blake Brittain and Jonathan Stempel: Apple, Broadcom Win New Trial in $1.1 Billion Caltech Patent Case (Source: Reuters)
Commentary and Journal Articles:
- Dan Mahaffee: Counterproductive Patent Policies Threaten US Tech Leadership (Source: The Hill)
- Coronapod: How African Scientists are Copying Moderna’s COVID Vaccine (Source: Apple Podcasts)
- Prof. C. Scott Hemphill and Prof. Erik Hovenkamp: Antitrust and Trademark Settlements (Source: SSRN)
New Job Postings on Patently-O:
Dan Mahaffee: Counterproductive Patent Policies Threaten US Tech Leadership (Source: The Hill)
How? I have just finished reading the whole article, and nowhere did the author explain how the DOJ’s recent moves will lead to a diminishment in U.S. tech leadership.
Indeed, in the antepenultimate paragraph, the author speaks of “Chinese leadership in advanced technologies ranging from 5G networks… .” To the extent that CN patent holders control the current technology, should we not want to devalue their IP? The author’s conclusion does not jibe with his premises.
The kernel of the best
L
I
E
S
may well have elements of truth.
Greg refuses to see any aspect of localized effects of intra-Sovereign innovation, refuses to recognize the Sovereign -centric nature of patent law — this is nothing more than his Big Pharma bias, and his refusing to budge from his peak of Mount S.
The Mahaffee article presupposes that its readers are grounded in the Sovereign-Centric nature of patent law (clearly, something that Greg lacks), and instead is merely reflecting the Liberal Left (Biden) capitulation in the diminution of patent power.
Greg plays the emotive f00l with his “To the extent that CN patent holders control the current technology, should we not want to devalue their IP?” to which of course to anyone that has actually studied innovation is a resounding “No,” as strong patents HELP disruptive innovation.
But Greg will be Greg, and all the more the pity.
Comments are closed.