Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Competition policy in patent cases and antitrust.

Gerald Sobel1

  • 1Partner Kaye Scholer LLP, New York, New York 10022-3598, USA.

Advances in Genetics
|January 13, 2004
PubMed
Summary

The Federal Circuit narrowed patent scope, overlooking how patents stimulate innovation and competition. This approach risks diminishing future invention incentives by allowing easy copying of patented technologies.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

Shaping mammalian genomes: The regulation and co-option of transposable elements in early development and gametogenesis.

Advances in genetics·2026
Same journal

Transposable elements in aging: From biomarkers to effectors.

Advances in genetics·2026
Same journal

Transposable elements in human cancer: Regulation, activation, and genomic consequences.

Advances in genetics·2026
Same journal

Retrotransposons as both "architects" and "saboteurs" in the nervous system.

Advances in genetics·2026
Same journal

Transposable element analysis in OMICS data.

Advances in genetics·2026
Same journal

The implication of lncRNAs in the regulation of inflammation.

Advances in genetics·2026

Area of Science:

  • Intellectual Property Law
  • Competition Policy
  • Patent Law

Background:

  • The article analyzes competition policy in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's patent decisions.
  • Focuses on how claim construction and the doctrine of equivalents have been narrowed, impacting patent scope.

Observation:

  • The court's decisions prioritized competitor protection over the pro-competitive benefits of patents.
  • This narrow view overlooks patents' role in stimulating invention and development.
  • Historical antitrust jurisprudence evolved to respect patents and discourage free-riding.

Findings:

  • The Federal Circuit's reasoning mirrors rejected views on patent-antitrust law.
  • The Festo decision created a near-absolute bar on equivalents for narrowed claims, allowing widespread copying.
  • This significantly alters patent scope and diminishes incentives for future innovation.

Implications:

  • The ruling could lead to widespread infringement through minor claim modifications.
  • It undermines the balance between protecting inventors and fostering competition.
  • The decision alters patentees' expectations and potentially reduces future R&D investment.

Related Experiment Videos