Scholarship Critical of “Schedule A” Cases
A growing chorus of scholarly concern about “Schedule A” cases appears to be catching the attention of some district courts. In a “Schedule A” case, a holder of U.S. intellectual property rights will sue a large collection of defendants, often online merchants based outside of the United States, which it will list in a “Schedule…
Continue ReadingMore Thoughts on the Seventh Circuit’s Motorola Decision
Like Tim Holbrook, we found the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Motorola Solutions, Inc. v. Hytera Communications Corp. Ltd. provocative. Motorola expands the reach of the Defend Trade Secrecy Act (DTSA) in ways that strike us as inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s concerns about extraterritorial application of U.S. law, particularly in the context of intellectual property…
Continue ReadingNew Scholarship on Anti-Suit Injunctions
Raghavendra R. Murthy, outgoing Editor-in-Chief of the Vanderbilt Law Review, has published a note on antisuit injunctions and patent litigation: Why Can’t We Be FRANDs?: Anti-Suit Injunctions, International Comity, and International Commercial Arbitration in Standard-Essential Patent Litigation. The note explores the rise of anti-suit injunctions related to the licensing of “standard-essential patents.” Owners of such…
Continue ReadingTerritoriality v. Extraterritoriality in Intellectual Property
A core principle in U.S. intellectual property (IP) law is that IP rights are territorially limited. A U.S. patent, copyright, trademark, or trade secret affords the holder exclusive rights solely within the United States. This principle also exists at the international level, as reflected in the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS)….
Continue Reading