The majority of the readings for this course are freely available in the public domain.
| SES # | TOPICS | ASSIGNED READINGS |
|---|---|---|
| PART 1: Introduction | ||
| 1 | Historical and philosophical background of patents and other intellectual property |
Optional Reading:Rines, Robert H. 1964. Create or Perish: The Case for Inventions and Patents (PDF - 1.0MB). Acropolis. |
| 2 |
The U.S. patent system: the Constitution, Congress, Patent Office (PTO), and courts Analyzing and understanding judicial opinions |
U.S. Constitution, Article, 1 Sec. 8 (PDF) Excerpts from U.S. Government Manual (PDF), 2011, and from "Court Systems of the United States." "Sample Patent" (PDF) for use with the following video: "Introduction to the Patent System," FJC #4342-V/02, Oct. 2002. |
| PART 2: Comparative overview of patents, copyrights, trade secrets, and trademarks | ||
| 3 |
Legal fundamentals of patent protection for useful inventions Design and plant patents |
35 U.S.C. (Patents), excerpts (PDF) Diamond v. Diehr (PDF), 450 U.S. 175 (1981) |
| 4 |
Legal fundamentals of copyright protection Similarity and access Expression vs. ideas and information, merger |
17 U.S.C. (Copyrights), excerpts (PDF) Bagley, and Dauchy. Chapter 14 in The Entrepreneur's Guide to Business Law. Cengage Learning, 2011, pp. 529–42. ISBN: 9780538466462. [Preview with Google Books] Selle v. Gibb (PDF), 741 F.2d 896 (7th Cir. 1984) Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service (PDF), 499 U.S. 340 (1991) |
| 5 |
Fair use of copyrighted works (e.g., for classroom use) Contributory copyright infringement |
17 U.S.C. § 107 (Fair use) (PDF) Cambridge University Press v. Becker (PDF), ___ F.Supp. ___ (N.D. Ga. May 11, 2012) No. 1:08-CV1425-ODE MGM v. Grokster (PDF), 125 S.Ct. 2764 (2005) |
| 6 |
Critical differences between patent and copyright protection Copyright infringement distinguished from plagiarism |
Baker v. Selden (PDF), 101 U.S. 99 (1897) Lotus v. Borland (PDF), 49 F.3d 807 (1st Cir. 1995), affirmed, per curiam, 516 U.S. 233 (1996) |
| 7 | Legal fundamentals of trade-secret protection |
Uniform Trade Secrets Act, abridged, NCCUSL (1985) (PDF) Bagley, and Dauchy. Chapter 14 in The Entrepreneur's Guide to Business Law. Cengage Learning, 2011, pp. 518–29. ISBN: 9780538466462. [Preview with Google Books] Wexler v. Greenberg (PDF), 399 Pa. 569 (1960) |
| 8 | Legal fundamentals of trademark protection |
15 U.S.C., Ch. 22 (Trademarks), excerpts (PDF) Bagley, and Dauchy. Chapter 14 in The Entrepreneur's Guide to Business Law. Cengage Learning, 2011, pp. 558–69. ISBN: 9780538466462. [Preview with Google Books] Lois Sportswear v. Levi Strauss (PDF), 799 F.2d 867 (2d Cir. 1986) |
| PART 3: Requirements and limitations of patentability | ||
| 9 |
New and useful: (A) The legal requirement of novelty (B) First to invent vs. first inventor to file |
35 U.S.C. § 102 (Old and new) (PDF) Structural Rubber Products v. Park Rubber (PDF - 1.6MB), 749 F.2d 707 (Fed. Cir. 1984) Pfaff v. Wells (PDF), 525 U.S. 55 (1998) |
| 10 | The legal requirement of non-obviousness |
35 U.S.C. § 103 (Non-obvious subject matter) (PDF) Graham v. John Deere Co. (PDF), 383 U.S. 1 (1966) KSR International v. Teleflex (PDF), 550 U.S. 398 (2007) |
| 11 |
Statutory subject matter and judicial exceptions: (A) Patentability of algorithms, software, and business methods |
State Street Bank & Trust v. Signature Financial Group (PDF), 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998) Bilski v. Kappos (PDF), 561 U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 3218 (2010) |
| 12 |
Statutory subject matter and judicial exceptions: (B) Patentability of medical treatments and human genes |
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Labs (PDF) 566 U.S. ___ (No. 10–1150. March 20, 2012). Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (PDF), 569 U.S. ___ (No. 12–398; June 13, 2013) |
| PART 4: The process of applying for a patent ("patent prosecution") | ||
| 13 |
Anatomy of a patent application Adequate disclosure |
35 U.S.C. § 112 (Specification) (PDF) 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.71-1.77 (Patents, trademarks, copyrights) (PDF) |
| 14 | The art of drafting patent claims |
File history and cited prior patents for U.S. Patent No. 4,408,919 (PDF - 2.2MB) Morse's "Claim 8." O'Reilly v. Morse. Case: 56 U.S. (15 How.) 62, 1853. |
| 15 |
Patent searching: (A) Purposes and techniques | No readings |
| 16 |
Patent searching: (B) On-line tools available to MIT students | No readings |
| PART 5: Actions for patent infringement | ||
| 17 |
Interpretation of claims Doctrine of equivalents Product testing as a possibly infringing use Doctrine of exhaustion |
Markman v. Westview Instruments (PDF), 517 U.S. 370 (1996) Warner-Jenkinson v. Hilton Davis (PDF), 520 U.S. 17 (1997) Roche v. Bolar (PDF), 733 F.2d 858, (1984) Bowman v. Monsanto Co. et. al. (PDF) ___ U.S. ___ (No. 11–769; May 13, 2013) |
| 18 | Legal and equitable remedies for infringement |
Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood (PDF), 318 F.Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970) eBay v. MercExchange (PDF), 547 U.S. 388 (2006) |
| 19 | Anatomy of patent litigation |
 U.S. Patent No. 7, 314, 044 "Marine Emissions Control" (PDF)
|
| 20 | Courtroom visit to current patent trial: Federal Courthouse, Boston | No readings |
| PART 6: Other important issues | ||
| 21 | Student presentations of patent-search results | No readings |
| 22 |
(A) Patent licensing (B) Non-competition agreements |
An Inventor's Guide to Technology Transfer at MIT (PDF - 2.1MB) Marx, Matt. "The Firm Strikes Back: Non-compete Agreements and the Mobility of Technical Professionals." American Sociological Review 76, no. 5 (2011): 695–712. |
| 23 | Rights and obligations among co-inventors, co-authors, employers, and licensees | |