The Audience in Intellectual Property Infringement

Jeanne Fromer, Mark A. Lemley
{"title":"The Audience in Intellectual Property Infringement","authors":"Jeanne Fromer, Mark A. Lemley","doi":"10.17605/OSF.IO/DXPT7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Every IP right has its own definition of infringement. In this paper, we suggest that this diversity of legal rules is largely traceable to differences in the audience in IP cases. Patent, trademark, copyright, and design patent each focus on a different person as the fulcrum for evaluating IP infringement. The fact that patent law focuses on an expert audience while trademark looks to a consumer audience explains many of the differences in how patent and trademark cases are decided. Expert audiences are likely to evaluate infringement based on the technical similarity between the plaintiff’s and defendant’s works. Consumers, by contrast, are likely to pay more attention to market substitution and less attention to how things work under the hood. Understanding the different audiences in IP infringement is critical to understanding how the IP regimes define infringement.The focus on audience has normative as well as descriptive implications. Neither patent law, with its focus on experts and technical similarity, nor trademark law, with its market-based consumer focus, has it entirely correct. Rather, we suggest that as a general matter infringement of an IP right should require both technical similarity and market substitution. Assessing infringement through the expert’s eyes ensures that the law prevents closely related works in the field while allowing later contributions to the field that are sufficiently different. The consumer vantage point ensures that we protect IP owners only when they have been harmed in the marketplace. IP owners who want to show infringement should have to show both that the defendant’s work is technically similar to their own from the expert’s vantage point and that the defendant’s use causes the plaintiff market harm. Copyright law, which does look both to experts and to consumers at various points in infringement analysis, is on the right track.","PeriodicalId":90732,"journal":{"name":"Stanford technology law review : STLR : an online high-technology law journal from Stanford Law School","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stanford technology law review : STLR : an online high-technology law journal from Stanford Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DXPT7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Every IP right has its own definition of infringement. In this paper, we suggest that this diversity of legal rules is largely traceable to differences in the audience in IP cases. Patent, trademark, copyright, and design patent each focus on a different person as the fulcrum for evaluating IP infringement. The fact that patent law focuses on an expert audience while trademark looks to a consumer audience explains many of the differences in how patent and trademark cases are decided. Expert audiences are likely to evaluate infringement based on the technical similarity between the plaintiff’s and defendant’s works. Consumers, by contrast, are likely to pay more attention to market substitution and less attention to how things work under the hood. Understanding the different audiences in IP infringement is critical to understanding how the IP regimes define infringement.The focus on audience has normative as well as descriptive implications. Neither patent law, with its focus on experts and technical similarity, nor trademark law, with its market-based consumer focus, has it entirely correct. Rather, we suggest that as a general matter infringement of an IP right should require both technical similarity and market substitution. Assessing infringement through the expert’s eyes ensures that the law prevents closely related works in the field while allowing later contributions to the field that are sufficiently different. The consumer vantage point ensures that we protect IP owners only when they have been harmed in the marketplace. IP owners who want to show infringement should have to show both that the defendant’s work is technically similar to their own from the expert’s vantage point and that the defendant’s use causes the plaintiff market harm. Copyright law, which does look both to experts and to consumers at various points in infringement analysis, is on the right track.
知识产权侵权中的受众
每一项知识产权都有自己的侵权定义。在本文中,我们认为这种法律规则的多样性在很大程度上可以追溯到知识产权案件中受众的差异。专利、商标、版权和外观设计专利都以不同的人作为评估知识产权侵权的支点。专利法关注的是专家受众,而商标关注的是消费者受众,这一事实解释了专利和商标案件如何判决的许多差异。专家观众可能会根据原告和被告作品之间的技术相似性来评估侵权行为。相比之下,消费者可能会更多地关注市场替代,而不太关注产品背后的运作方式。了解知识产权侵权的不同受众是理解知识产权制度如何定义侵权的关键。对受众的关注既有规范性含义,也有描述性含义。无论是注重专家和技术相似性的专利法,还是注重消费者市场的商标法,都不完全正确。相反,我们建议,作为一般事项,侵犯知识产权应同时要求技术相似性和市场替代。通过专家的眼光来评估侵权行为,可以确保法律阻止该领域密切相关的作品,同时允许对该领域的后期贡献有足够的不同。消费者的优势确保了我们只有在知识产权所有者在市场上受到伤害时才会保护他们。想要证明侵权的知识产权所有者必须证明,从专家的角度来看,被告的作品在技术上与他们自己的作品相似,并且被告的使用对原告造成了市场损害。版权法确实在侵权分析的各个方面都关注专家和消费者,这是在正确的轨道上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信