Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

Recent Headlines in the IP World:

Commentary and Journal Articles:

New Job Postings on Patently-O:

10 thoughts on “Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

  1. 4

    “The Influence of Alice”

    More accurately: The Devastation of Alice

    “All your patents are belong to us.”

    — SCOTUS
    — CAFC
    — PTAB
    — Big Tech

  2. 3

    CVSG in American Axle today.

    1. 3.1

      Thanks hr.

  3. 2

    The Reuters headline appears to be trolling us. The White House is only “considering” the waiver in the sense that the twenty seconds between the question “will you support the waiver?” and the answer “no” constitutes twenty seconds of “considering.”

    1. 2.1

      The issue of patent waivers is somewhat misleading. Because patent law is national (meaning patent law in a country are controlled entirely by that country), any country could issue a waiver within its own borders at any time. That might cause problems if they’ve joined the PCT, but that’s a different can of worms. The problem isn’t primarily patent waivers related to vaccines. The problem is more about the technology, know-how, and facilities to make the vaccines. There are a huge number of developing countries where the issue of the waiver is completely meaningless because they don’t have the technical expertise to make them regardless of whether or not there are issued patents covering that technology.

      1. 2.1.1

        The issue of patent waivers is somewhat misleading. Because patent law is national (meaning patent law in a country are controlled entirely by that country), any country could issue a waiver within its own borders at any time.

        This is a very worthy point that I think is largely getting lost in the discussion. Really, there are two sets of “waivers” at issue: (1) at the WTO level; and (2) at the national level. The discussion is largely conflating these issues, as if the grant of the WTO waiver would automatically confer a national level waiver.

        A WTO waiver would not automatically waive IP rights at the various national levels. Even if the WTO were to grant the waiver, that would merely mean that if (e.g.) India were to waive IP rights in its borders, then other WTO member nations could not prosecute India for this violation of TRIPS in front of the WTO. Even after the waiver, however, U.S. IP rights would remain in force unless and until the U.S. Congress (and—in the case of trade secrets—the various state legislatures) suspend them.

      1. 2.2.1

        Ha!

      2. 2.2.2

        Must be one hilarious place to work!

        An onion by any other name . . .

  4. 1

    Expecting Greg to weigh in on the Prof. Lim paper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You can click here to Subscribe without commenting

Add a picture