Tag Archives: patent

IPSC: Comparative & International IP

Karen Sandrik, Marquette University Law School, Cultural Legacies and Innovation Barriers: Comparative Lessons from Post–Soviet Research Institutions for American Innovation Policy Slovakia: Comenius U press release about first official patent sold/assigned by a Slovak university. They spent a year negotiating … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

WIPIP: Innovation policy

Michael Burstein, The Law of the Direction of Innovation Foundational texts: NBER Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, and revisited. But we need to ask: what innovation should we prioritize? What innovation, by whom, and for whom? These are contestable … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

literal falsity might not matter with sufficiently sophisticated customers

G. W. Aru, LLC v. W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn., No. JKB-22-2636, 2025 WL 45827 (D. Md. Jan. 7, 2025) I’m skipping most of the patent parts, though they are very much present in the case and interact with a … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

false “patented/proprietary/exclusive” claims can be actionable despite Dastar

Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., No. 2022-2160 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2024) Crocs sued competitors for patent infringement; defendant Dawgs counterclaimed for false advertising about the characteristics of the primary material Crocs uses to make its footwear products, a material … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

IPSC Breakout 4 IP and Property/Contract Theory

Shyam Balganesh, The Eunomics of Intellectual Property Lon Fuller’s institutional design theory: understand institutional design as a way of understanding institutions on the understanding that they’re not infinitely mutable. One shouldn’t begin with an unilateral approach on their ends. Ordinary … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

False patent marking claims survive even when Dastar bars false advertising claims based on “innovation”

Lashify, Inc. v. Qingdao Lashbeauty Cosmetic Co., 2024 WL 629985, No. W-22-CV-00776-ADA-DTG, No. W-22-CV-00777-ADA-DTG (W.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act false advertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

WIPIP session 7: Design Law

Rachael Dickson, Administrative Discrimination? At the Trademark Office [I feel like there’s a Panic! At the Disco joke to be made here.] ID manual: a searchable database of acceptable IDs of goods/services, regularly updated and changed to adapt; you can … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

WIPIP session 6: IP Theory

Andrew Gilden, Talking Pleasure in IP Courts and advocates are skeptical of value of pleasure; when they want to honor it, they reframe it as something else, like social justice. Joy of producing/consuming can be important motivation for activities, though, … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Dastar bars false marking claims brought under Lanham Act (dubitante)

Urban Dollz LLC v. Lashify, Inc., 2023 WL 8292459, No. CV 23-1427-GW-AFMx (C.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2023) Super-interesting holding that, while there’s no patent field preemption against bringing false patent marking claims under the Lanham Act, Dastar (as expansively interpreted … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

accusing someone of patent infringement can be actionable disparagement if you know the patent’s invalid

Cap Export, LLC v. Zinus, Inc., 2023 WL 6381821, No. 2:21-cv-07148-JWH-MRWx (C.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2023) Cap Export alleged that Zinus fraudulently obtained a patent after Zinus used the public domain bed-in-a-box sets of a non-party as the basis for … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment