Brenda M. Simon
Thomas Jefferson School of Law; Stanford Law School - Center for Law & the Biosciences
May 8, 2010
Houston Law Review, Vol. 47, No. 5, p. 1299, 2011
Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper No. 1599893
Companies are using patents to hide problems. Patents are supposed to encourage innovation and the dissemination of information, but sometimes they do just the opposite. Using the threat of litigation or restrictive licensing practices, patent holders have hindered rigorous evaluation of their patented technology. This Article examines patent cover-up in the areas of identification chips, genetic testing, and agricultural biotechnology.
I discuss how much control patent holders should be able to exercise over information related to their technology. Information resulting from independent quality assessment should be beyond the patent holder’s reach, considering its importance for privacy, health, and security. Unless courts interpret existing patent doctrines broadly enough to permit quality assessment, I propose that Congress or the courts should adopt a defense to infringement to allow for it.
The proposed exception would allow for the use of a patented invention for quality assessment. This includes activities necessary to identify and analyze limitations and weaknesses of the patented invention. Because the quality assessment exception does not protect alternatives that could supplant demand for the patented technology, it is less likely to undercut incentives to innovate. An exception permitting quality assessment strikes a reasonable balance between the normal exploitation of the patent and the legitimate interests of the public.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 58
Keywords: patent, defense, exception, innovation, testing, information, privacy, genetic testing, agricultural biotechnology, misuse, exhaustion
JEL Classification: K19, K29, K39, O3, O31, O32, O34
Date posted: May 8, 2010 ; Last revised: February 1, 2014
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.265 seconds