Private Law Theory

Introduction:
In his article, Purging Patent Law of ‘Private Law’ Remedies, Professor Sichelman offers a welcome and useful perspective on the reform of patent remedies. His general thesis — that patent law’s policy of promoting innovation must take precedence in shaping the outcome of patent cases — is surely correct, and his goal of ensconcing innovation as the guiding principle of patent remedies is admirable. Yet as a teacher of torts and remedies as well as patents, I worry as I trace the road he takes toward that goal. My concern is that he may be blazing a trail that is far steeper and rougher than it need be. I suspect first, that he has made some unnecessary assumptions about the nature of the remedial enterprise; and second, that his recommendation to ‘purge patent law’, with its undertones of ethnic cleansing or medieval medical treatment, is probably needlessly dramatic …

Dan L Burk, ‘Response Means and Meaning in Patent Remedies’. Texas Law Review – See Also. Volume 92, 13 (2014).

First posted 2014-02-25 12:54:02