New Issue of IP Law Review Available

Congratulations to the staff of the Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review for the completion of a new issue.  All of the articles are available in pdf here.  Outgoing editor-in-chief Laura Steele sends along the following announcement and summary of the issue:

On behalf of the staff of the Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review, I am pleased to announce the arrival of the second issue of volume fourteen, available now in print and online.

This issue highlights the work of several scholars. The issue opens with the Thirteenth Annual Helen Wilson Nies Memorial Lecture in Intellectual Property Law. The lecture was given this fall by John F. Duffy, the Oswald Symister Colclough Research Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School. Professor Duffy has updated and expanded his speech, “Innovation and Recovery,” to reflect recent developments in scholarship and patent law.

Max Stul Oppenheimer, associate professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, recognizes the importance of protecting consumers who are among the first to adopt new technologies in “The Time and Place for ‘Technology-Shifting’ Rights.” Professor Oppenheimer argues that statutory and judicial steps must be taken to secure the rights of consumers to the use of their patented or copyrighted works when the technology they invested in becomes obsolete and new technology emerges.

Yi-Chen Su, managing partner of the Asian office for Milner Law Office, PLLC, traces the development of the “obviousness” standard for patents in “What About Know-How: Heightened Obviousness and Lowered Disclosure is not a Panacea to the American Patent System for Biotechnology Medication and Pharmaceutical Inventions in the Post-KSR Era.” In this Article, Su argues that judge-made, industry-specific standards of obviousness in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals are consistent with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Teleflex v. KSR, but that such standards should not be literally applied to all types of inventions without further consideration.

This issue also features the work of three student scholars: Jesse Dill examines the propertization of trademarks through the lens of John Locke’s labor theory and William Blackstone’s Clear-Act Principle in “Possessing Trademarks: Can Blackstone or Locke Apply to Fast Food, Grocery Stores, and Virtual Sex Toys?”; Michelle Moran contends that quilt artists should receive the same intellectual property protections as other artists in “Quilt Artists: Left Out in the Cold by the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990”; and Laura Steele critiques courts’ treatment of the trademark licensing rights in bankruptcy in “Actual or Hypothetical: Determining the Proper Test for Trademark Licensee Rights in Bankruptcy.”

This issue also includes two transcripts. The first, “An Uncomfortable Fit?: Intellectual Property Policy and the Administrative State,” transcribes a 2009 panel discussion at the Southeastern Association of Law Schools conference. The panel was led by Kali Murray and included professors Sapna Kumar, Jason Mazzone, Hannibal Travis, and Jasmine Abdel-khalik. The panelists take an interdisciplinary look at how intellectual property is treated in the administrative law context. Finally, the issue closes with an insight into the practice of patent litigation by Marquette Law alum Rick McDermott in “Lessons Learned from Fifteen Years in the Trenches of Patent Litigation.”

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.