DOC PREVIEW
CMU ISR 08732 - Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry

This preview shows page 1-2-3-4-27-28-29-30-55-56-57-58 out of 58 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 58 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Patent Scope and Innovation in theSoftware IndustryJulie E. Cohen†Mark A. Lemley‡Table of ContentsIntroduction.................................................................................................4I. Software Patents: History, Practice, and Theory .....................................7A. History: The Section 101 Patentability Debate..............................8B. Practice: Anything Goes?.............................................................11C. Theory: Software Patents and the “Prospect” Theory ofPatent Scope..................................................................................14II. Reverse Engineering Patented Software................................................16A. Software-Specific Barriers to Lawful Reverse Engineering ofPatented Inventions.......................................................................17B. Innovation and Reverse Engineering: An Industry-Based Analysis........................................................................................21 Copyright © 2001, Julie Cohen and Mark Lemley.† Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center.‡ Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley, School of Law (Boalt Hall); ofcounsel, Fish & Richardson P.C. We would like to thank Fred Abbott, Erv Basinski, Dan Burk, ChrisByrne, Tom Cotter, Alan Durham, Richard Gruner, Rose Hagan, Paul Heald, Dennis Karjala, RonaldMann, David McGowan, Peter Menell, Rob Merges, Mike Meurer, Tyler Ochoa, Margaret Jane Radin,Arti Rai, Pam Samuelson, Jay Thomas, Polk Wagner, David Welkowitz, participants in the 27thAnnual Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, participants in faculty workshops at theBoston University School of Law and Whittier Law School for their comments on earlier versions, andMitzi Chang and Elizabeth Monkus for research assistance. Need we mention that the ideas andmistakes contained herein are ours alone, and are not attributable to anyone else?Permission is hereby granted for copies of this Article to be made and distributed for educationaluse, provided that: (i) copies are distributed at or below cost; (ii) the authors and the California LawReview are identified; and (iii) proper notice of copyright is affixed.12 CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 89:11. Access to the Patented Invention............................................232. Access to Unpatented Components........................................253. The Intellectual Property Balance ..........................................264. Litigation-Related Uses..........................................................28C. Creating a Right to Reverse Engineer Patented Software.............291. Experimental Use ...................................................................292. First Sale, Implied License, and Exhaustion ..........................303. Patent Misuse..........................................................................354. New Legislation......................................................................36III. Designing Around Existing Software Patents......................................37A. Systemic Biases Toward a Broad Range of Equivalents ..............391. Incremental, Modular Innovation and Design forInteroperability .......................................................................402. Undocumented Prior Art ........................................................423. The Rapid Pace of Change .....................................................454. Equivalence and Text .............................................................47B. Innovation and Equivalence: An Industry-Based Analysis..........50C. Tailoring the Doctrine of Equivalents to the Software Industry...53Conclusion .................................................................................................562001] PATENT SCOPE AND INNOVATION 3Patent Scope and Innovation in theSoftware IndustryJulie E. CohenMark A. LemleySoftware patents have received a great deal of attention in the academicliterature. Unfortunately, most of that attention has been devoted to theproblem of whether software is or should be patentable subject matter.With roughly eighty thousand software patents already issued, and theFederal Circuit endorsing patentability without qualification, those ques-tions are for the history books. The more pressing questions now concernthe scope to be accorded software patents. In this Article, we examine theimplications of some traditional patent law doctrines for innovation in thesoftware industry. We argue that patent law needs some refinement if it isto promote rather than impede the growth of this new market, which ischaracterized by rapid sequential innovation, reuse and re-combination ofcomponents, and strong network effects that privilege interoperable com-ponents and products. In particular, we argue for two sorts of new rules insoftware patent cases.First, we advocate a limited right to reverse engineer patented computerprograms in order to gain access to and study those programs and to du-plicate their unprotected elements. Such a right is firmly established incopyright law, and seems unexceptional as a policy matter even in patentlaw. But because patent law contains no fair use or reverse engineeringexemption, patentees could use the grant of rights covering a single com-ponent of a complex program to prevent any “making” or “using” of theprogram as a whole, including those temporary uses needed in reverse en-gineering. While patent law does contain doctrines of “experimental use”and “exhaustion,” it is not clear that those doctrines will protect legitimatereverse engineering efforts. We suggest that if these doctrines cannot beread broadly enough to establish such a right, Congress should create alimited right to reverse engineer software containing patented componentsfor research purposes.Second, we argue that in light of the special nature of innovation within thesoftware industry, courts should apply the doctrine of equivalents narrowlyin infringement cases. The doctrine of equivalents allows a finding of4 CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 89:1infringement even when the accused product does not literally satisfy eachelement of the patent, if there is substantial equivalence as to each element.The test of equivalence is the known interchangeability of claimed andaccused elements at the time of (alleged) infringement. A number of factorsunique to software and the software industry—a culture of


View Full Document

CMU ISR 08732 - Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry

Documents in this Course
gnusort

gnusort

5 pages

Notes

Notes

24 pages

Citron

Citron

63 pages

Load more
Download Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?