Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1255743
 
 

Footnotes (78)



 


 



Taming the Doctrine of Equivalents in Light of 'Patent Failure'


Samson Vermont


University of Miami - School of Law; Charlotte School of Law

August 25, 2008

George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 08-54

Abstract:     
In their book "Patent Failure", Jim Bessen and Michael Meurer show that patents outside the fields of chemistry and pharmaceuticals discourage innovation. One reason is that, outside these two fields, patents provide poor notice of what technology is owned and who owns it. Poor notice is due in part to the doctrine of equivalents (DOE). This essay argues against abolishing the DOE, and instead proposes two reforms to mitigate the DOE's interference with notice. First, courts should always stay permanent injunctions against DOE infringement for a modest period of time, e.g., for one year from the date of final judgment. Second, courts should treat equivalents under 35 USC 112(6) the same as DOE equivalents. This essay also briefly reevaluates the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel in light of "Patent Failure".

Number of Pages in PDF File: 29

working papers series





Download This Paper

Date posted: August 27, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Vermont, Samson, Taming the Doctrine of Equivalents in Light of 'Patent Failure' (August 25, 2008). George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 08-54. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1255743 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1255743

Contact Information

Samson Vermont (Contact Author)
University of Miami - School of Law ( email )
Miami, FL
United States

Charlotte School of Law
Charlotte
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 534
Downloads: 93
Download Rank: 167,529
Footnotes:  78
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.328 seconds