Keeping Time Machinese and Teleporters in the Public Doman: Fiction as Prior Art for Patent Examination

Works of fiction sometimes contain disclosures of inventions that operate as a bar to patentability, preventing inventors who actually make those inventions from subsequently patenting them. This is because the fictional disclosures effectively destroy the novelty of the inventions or render them obvious. Despite such disclosures, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office does not habitually or effectively search through fiction for pertinent prior art in its examinations. This paper explores the legal, economic, and pragmatic considerations if searching fiction is to become part of the patent examination process. Until recently, it was impracticable to search fiction in a manner that would accurately locate pertinent prior art. However, with the advent of the Google Book Search Project, fiction can be both effectively and efficiently searched for the first time in history. Ultimately, the strong public interest in keeping invalid patents from issuing requires that fictional prior art searching be incorporated into patent examinations

Enabling Science Fiction

Patent law promotes innovation by giving inventors 20-year-long exclusive rights to their inventions. To be patented, however, an invention must be “enabled,” meaning the inventor must describe it in enough detail to teach others how to make and use the invention at the time the patent is filed. When inventions are not enabled, like a perpetual motion machine or a time travel device, they are derided as “mere science fiction”—products of the human mind, or the daydreams of armchair scientists, that are not suitable for the patent system. This Article argues that, in fact, the literary genre of science fiction has its own unique—albeit far laxer—enablement requirement. Since the genre’s origins, fans have demanded that the inventions depicted in science fiction meet a minimum standard of scientific plausibility. Otherwise, the material is denigrated as lazy hand-waving or, worse, “mere fantasy.” Taking this insight further, the Article argues that, just as patents positively affect the progress of science and technology by teaching others how to make and use real inventions, so too can science fiction, by stimulating scientists’ imagination about what sorts of technologies might one day be possible. Thus, like patents, science fiction can have real world impacts for the development of science and technology. Indeed, the Article reveals that this trajectory—from science fiction to science reality—can be seen in the patent record itself, with several famous patents tracing their origins to works of science fiction

Brief of Amici Curiae 56 Professors of Law and Economics in Support of Petition of Writ of Certiorari

28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is incorporated or has a regular and established place of business and has infringed the patent. This Court made clear in Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Prods. Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 223 (1957), that those were the only permissible venues for a patent case. But the Federal Circuit has rejected Fourco and the plain meaning of § 1400(b), instead permitting a patent plaintiff to file suit against a defendant anywhere there is personal jurisdiction over that defendant. The result has been rampant forum shopping, particularly by patent trolls. 44% of 2015 patent lawsuits were filed in a single district: the Eastern District of Texas, a forum with plaintiff-friendly rules and practices, and where few of the defendants are incorporated or have established places of business. And an estimated 86% of 2015 patent cases were filed somewhere other than the jurisdictions specified in the statute. Colleen V. Chien & Michael Risch, Recalibrating Patent Venue, Santa Clara Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-1 (Sept. 1, 2016), Table 3. This Court should grant certiorari to review the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because the Federal Circuit’s dubious interpretation of the statute plays an outsized and detrimental role, both legally and economically, in the patent system

Brief of Amici Curiae 56 Professors of Law and Economics in Support of Petition of Writ of Certiorari

28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is incorporated or has a regular and established place of business and has infringed the patent. This Court made clear in Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Prods. Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 223 (1957), that those were the only permissible venues for a patent case. But the Federal Circuit has rejected Fourco and the plain meaning of § 1400(b), instead permitting a patent plaintiff to file suit against a defendant anywhere there is personal jurisdiction over that defendant. The result has been rampant forum shopping, particularly by patent trolls. 44% of 2015 patent lawsuits were filed in a single district: the Eastern District of Texas, a forum with plaintiff-friendly rules and practices, and where few of the defendants are incorporated or have established places of business. And an estimated 86% of 2015 patent cases were filed somewhere other than the jurisdictions specified in the statute. Colleen V. Chien & Michael Risch, Recalibrating Patent Venue, Santa Clara Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-1 (Sept. 1, 2016), Table 3. This Court should grant certiorari to review the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because the Federal Circuit’s dubious interpretation of the statute plays an outsized and detrimental role, both legally and economically, in the patent system

Patent Law: Fundamentals of Doctrine and Policy

Patent Law: Fundamentals of Doctrine and Policy provides a remarkably accessible yet robust introduction to patent law and its practical application. Written in a straightforward style, the authors focus on providing a deep understanding of doctrine and policy, without “hiding the ball” in ways that can hinder student comprehension. The book will appeal to students who have scientific and technical backgrounds or prior patent experience, as well as students who simply have an interest in technology and innovation and seek a well-rounded legal education. The book teaches all the core patent statutes and doctrines in the United States patent system. Novelty, nonobviousness, subject matter, infringement, defenses, and remedies all receive thorough attention. The book also includes chapters that address the history of patent law, patent application drafting and prosecution, patent litigation, and design patents. These additional chapters afford students an opportunity to understand the law in its full and proper context. The authors employ several pedagogical methods to ensure students’ mastery of each topic. At the outset of each chapter and section are detailed explanations of the black-letter law. When new concepts are introduced, the text provides examples and explanations along with diagrams and illustrations. Case law is edited to emphasize legal principles and avoid excessive technological complexities. Following each case are “Case Comprehension” questions that reinforce key points, along with “Beyond the Case” questions that challenge students to apply doctrines and consider policy concerns outside the context of the specific case. Each substantive chapter concludes with a series of practice questions and an exam-style essay question. Answers to the practice questions and sample responses to the essay questions are provided at the end of the book. A teacher’s manual will be available for professors

Enabling Science Fiction

Patent law promotes innovation by giving inventors 20-year-long exclusive rights to their inventions. To be patented, however, an invention must be “enabled,” meaning the inventor must describe it in enough detail to teach others how to make and use the invention at the time the patent is filed. When inventions are not enabled, like a perpetual motion machine or a time travel device, they are derided as “mere science fiction”—products of the human mind, or the daydreams of armchair scientists, that are not suitable for the patent system. This Article argues that, in fact, the literary genre of science fiction has its own unique—albeit far laxer—enablement requirement. Since the genre’s origins, fans have demanded that the inventions depicted in science fiction meet a minimum standard of scientific plausibility. Otherwise, the material is denigrated as lazy hand-waving or, worse, “mere fantasy.” Taking this insight further, the Article argues that, just as patents positively affect the progress of science and technology by teaching others how to make and use real inventions, so too can science fiction, by stimulating scientists’ imagination about what sorts of technologies might one day be possible. Thus, like patents, science fiction can have real world impacts for the development of science and technology. Indeed, the Article reveals that this trajectory—from science fiction to science reality—can be seen in the patent record itself, with several famous patents tracing their origins to works of science fiction