Ruth Okediji: IP rights and the African innovation paradox (Global Congress 2013, Cape Town)

Ruth Okediji makes an argument that we need to resist and avoid consenting and legitimising a system of command and control in IP. Okediji’s starting point is that the essence of the fourth wave of IP geopolitical change is not about harmonisation: it’s about fundamentally de-anchoring IP from the public interest. It’s about a unilateral[…]

Drake IP 2013: Joshua Sarnoff, “Rethinking application drafting and examination”

Liveblogged from Drake IP Roundtable 2013. Joshua Sarnoff considers that we need a “Meta-theory” of reform in patent: this is not just about a better utilitarian calculus, but also fairness. The Patent Office is concerned with backlog of patents. There is a tradeoff between faster processing and reduced quality decisions. There are avenues congress, courts,[…]

Karen Sandrik, “Formality in patent licensing”

Liveblogged from Drake IP Roundtable 2013. Karen Sandrik asks what is the role of the common law in patent law right now? Argues we need a formal but forgiving approach. Where an inventor assigns a patent to a company, we need a formal but forgiving approach; when a firm assigns a patent to another firm,[…]

Drake IP 2013: William Hubbard, “The competitive advantage of weak patents”

Liveblogged from Drake IP Roundtable 2013. William Hubbard argues that weaker US patents may improve US competitive advantage. What makes companies competitive? Two relevant issues: Factor conditions – materials, labour; but also advanced factors: information, highly educated labour, specialised infrastructure. Domestic rivalry – domestic rivalry turns out to be more important for global competitiveness because:[…]

Drake IP 2013: Patricia Judd, the TRIPS balloon effect

Liveblogged from Drake IP Roundtable 2013. Patricia Judd asks how various aspects of the TRIPS agreement impact views of the WTO regulatory approach, and what this tells us about the legitimacy of the WTO system. Essentially, Judd argues that TRIPS is better than we give it credit for, less bad than the alternatives, and contains[…]

Drake IP 2013: Deidre Keller, ‘Why intellectual property needs property’

Liveblogged from Drake IP Roundtable 2013. Deidre Keller makes the argument that IP is property, and maybe that’s not such a bad thing. If we appreciate property in a more nuanced sense, the fact that it is property is less trouble. Keller argues that limitations from property should inform limitations in copyright, patents, and trade[…]

Drake IP 2013: Sapna Kumar, “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Genetic Information”

Liveblogged from Drake IP Roundtable 2013. Kumar presents a draft paper: “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Genetic Information“. Kumar notes that there is a constitutional right to bodily integrity. The right is strongest where there are no public health implications and no link to morality. There is also a right to refuse medical procedures,[…]

Standardisation and patent ambush: Potential liability under Australian competition law

Kylie Pappalardo and Nicolas Suzor, “Standardisation and patent ambush: Potential liability under Australian competition law” (2011) 18 CCLJ 267, here. This article examines the problem of patent ambush in standard setting, where patent owners are sometimes able to capture industry standards in order to secure monopoly power and windfall profits. Because standardisation generally introduces high[…]