Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> Legal Theory Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: Legal Theory BlogGolden on Crane on Intellectual Property Liability
By Lawrence Solum
John M. Golden (University of Texas School of Law) has posted Intellectual Liability in Context (Texas Law Review, Vol. 88, pp. 211-219, 2010) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
-
In Intellectual Liability, Daniel Crane reemphasizes that a ?right to exclude? is only one part of a Hohfeldian package of rights, privileges, powers, or immunities that government can grant an intellectual property (IP) owner. Crane points out that an overly vigorous right to exclude, one backed up by a strong presumption of injunctive relief against continued infringement, could result in a suboptimal IP package even from the IP owner?s perspective. Drawing on examples of antitrust-influenced behavior of collective-rights organizations and standard-setting organizations, Crane argues that forgoing property-rule treatment in the Calabresi?Melamed sense can be more than compensated, socially and possibly even privately, by IP owners? gains of privileges and powers to participate in one or more practices of ?bundling,? as through a collective-rights organization or standard-setting organization, or through acquisition of large numbers of patents in the manner of a so-called ?patent troll.? Crane?s bottom line thus expands on the prescription underlying Louis Kaplow?s ?ratio test? of more than a quarter century ago: the optimal package to be granted IP owners should be developed by providing ?those rights that grant just enough reward to induce... inventive or creative activity at the lowest social cost possible.?
Full post as published by Legal Theory Blog on December 28, 2010 (boomark / email).
Nanotechnology Law
Intellectual property laws
Construction Crane
Universal Concrete and Mi-JACK pay $1.6 million worker's compensation settlement after crane crushes an employee.
Compellent, Storage Engine, et. al.
$10.5 million settlement reached in intellectual property dispute.
General Electric Co. and SABIC Innovative Plastics
$3 million settlement reached in intellectual property dispute.
Bad Faith Insurance
Infinity Property and Casualty Corp. agrees to $13 million personal automobile liability insurance settlement.
Crane
Recalls Bath Tubs With A Whirlpool
Golden Dragon Frozen Cooked Mackerel Fish
Clostridium botulinum Alert

Intellectual Property And Access Can Co-Exist, US Rightsholders Say
Business Associations Limerick of the Week: Crane v. Anaconda
No trade secret : Jorda in the Hall of Fame
UNCITRAL Lays Groundwork For Policy On IP Assets And Financing
What Artists and Scholars Think About When They Think About Intellectual Property Law









