By: Robert Bray This paper has been adapted from a presentation given by the author at Duke University School of Law’s “Hot Topics in Intellectual Property Law Symposium” on April 1, 2005. It first presents an overview of the EU “Software Patents” Directive and many of the amendments that have been proposed and adopted. It then suggests a number of ways in which Europe can lead the world in developing a system that balances the interests of patent protection and open-source software. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0011
Day: May 1, 2005
A New Paradigm for Intellectual Property Rights in Software
By: Mark H. Webbink A Winter 2004 article by Bradford L. Smith and Susan O. Mann of Microsoft published in The University of Chicago Law Review suggests that the development and growth of the software industry in the U.S. is a direct outgrowth of the implementation of intellectual property regimes, specifically copyright and patent, with respect to software in the late 1970s and early 1980s. This paper suggests that such patents were neither the sole nor the principal factor for the development of the software industry, that concerns about patents manifested prior to or soon after their application to software have proven true, and that patents are, in fact, not serving the interests of either the U.S. software industry or the consuming public. To that end, this paper advances recommendations for reforming the U.S. patent system as well as consideration of a new schema for protecting software. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0012
Regulating Indecency: The Federal Communication Commission’s Threat to the First Amendment
By: Reed Hundt This paper is adapted from a talk given by the author at Duke University School of Law on April 6, 2005. The author argues that the Federal Communication Commission’s recent crackdown on television indecency poses a significant threat to First Amendment protections by (1) limiting television viewers’ freedom of choice and (2) implying the possibility of punishment for failure to cooperate with the political objectives of the governing party. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 2005 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 0013