Abstract
Professor Mark Lemley’s recent article, Does “Public Use” Mean the Same Thing It Did Last Year?, argues that the rule barring an inventor’s right to a patent when that inventor practiced the invention in secret but exploited it commercially for more than one year before filing a patent application survived the America Invents Act (AIA). The article also contends that the rule is correct for policy reasons. This essay agrees with Lemley's statutory interpretation but argues that the rule is inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent and should be abrogated based on common-law principles. This essay also argues that the rule creates significant costs and is inconsistent with the AIA's goal to harmonize the U.S. patent law with those of other countries.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
