Intellectual Property

Intellectual property (IP) rights help creators limit who uses their work without giving value in return. This protection encourages innovation in thought and expression. Academics featured on this site research topics such as open source licensing, digital rights management, patent reform, IP and technical standards, trademarks, and trade secrets.

Back to main Intellectual Property page

TAP Blog

Written summary from the “RAND Revisited” conference, hosted by the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology, provides a clear explanation of standard-essential patents and the importance of RAND licensing terms. Additionally, the recap provides highlights from the panel discussions that addressed RAND in the courts and the academic, regulatory, and corporate perspectives.
In The New York Times “Room for Debate” section, TAP scholars Tim Wu and Siva Vaidhyanathan discuss whether intellectual property law encourages or discourages innovation.
The Berkeley Center for Law and Technology hosted a day-long conference to discuss revising Chinese copyright laws, and enforcement challenges and strategies in China for holders of Chinese intellectual property rights.
Yesterday, President Barack Obama announced his nomination of F. Scott Kieff for Member position with the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) and Joshua D. Wright for Commissioner with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
Chris Sprigman shares his latest book, co-written with Kal Raustiala, The Knockoff Economy. He looks at innovation and the role of IP protection as well as imitation to foster creativity.
My latest essay for Ars Technica, “Why Johnny Can’t Stream: How Online Copyright Went Insane” is now online. From my perspective, it’s an attempt to tie together my blogging on cases like Aereo, Zediva, and ReDigi and to illustrate what they have in common. From a legal perspective, it’s the story of how the public performance right has gradually made less and less sense over the last few years.
TAP scholars share their expertise in reaction to the Apple v. Samsung decision.
Stan Liebowitz, Professor of Economics at the University of Texas at Dallas, discusses Andrew Popper’s brief on the problems and remedies of software theft. One of the points Professor Liebowitz makes is, “If the legal system of a country allows dishonest firms to gain an advantage over honest firms, then the competition between firms will tend to lead to a race to the bottom where the only firms left are dishonest and not particularly good at producing the products they are selling.”
Professor Joshua Gans, Rotman School of Management, takes a look at Friday’s verdict in the Apple-Samsung trial.
Professor Randy Picker, University of Chicago Law School, shares his thoughts on the Apple v. Samsung verdict that was delivered Friday.
Results 101 - 110 of 169
|< < 11 12 13 14 15 > >|

Fact Sheets

Software Patents

A patent provides an exclusive legal right to an invention for a limited period of time, in exchange for public disclosure of that innovation. As with other property rights, patents may be sold, transferred, or licensed for a third party’s use.


Lofi Girl Disappeared from YouTube and Reignited Debate Over Bogus Copyright Claims

“We ended up with this system because in the 1990s, when the contours of the internet and copyright are still coming into view, this is the compromise that representatives of the copyright industries and the internet industries worked out.” — James Grimmelmann, Professor of Law, Cornell University

James Grimmelmann
July 16, 2022

Featured Article

Beyond Eureka: What Creators Want (Freedom, Credit, and Audiences) and How Intellectual Property Can Better Give It to Them (by Supporting Sharing, Licensing, and Attribution)

Intellectual property (IP) law gives creators the right to stop others from using their created works. But IP law may fail to support creators’ achievement of goals such as creative freedom, proper attribution, and sharing.

By: Colleen Chien