Is Patent Law Technology Specific?
Dan L. Burk, Mark A. Lemley
Abstract
Although patent law purports to cover all manner of technologies, we have noticed recent divergence in the standards applied to biotechnology and to software patents: the Federal Circuit has applied a very permissive standard of obviousness in biotechnology, but a highly restrictive disclosure requirement. The opposite holds true for software patents, which seems to us exactly contrary to sound policy for either industry. These patent standards are grounded in the legal fiction of the "person having ordinary skill in the art" or PHOSITA. We discuss the appropriateness of the PHOSITA standard, concluding that it properly lends flexibility to the patent system. We then discuss the difficulty of applying this standard in different industries, offering suggestions as to how it might be modified to avoid the problems seen in biotechnology and software patents.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Adversarial Attacks Reveal Divergent Deception Competence in Humans and Generative Language Models
Lucca Pfründer, Riccardo Loconte, Bruno Verschuere et al.
Who Can Say No? Control, Accountability and the Pace of Frontier AI
Rikard Rosenbacke, Carl Rosenbacke, Victor Rosenbacke et al.
Developing Competency in AI Ethics: A training framework
Alexandra Prégent, Alexei Grinbaum
Large Language Models, Machine-Assisted Cultural Analytics, and the Agentic Turn
Andres Karjus
What Counts as Evidence? Epistemic Cue Utilization in Large Language Models
Jinchang Zhang, Kaijun Jiang, Guoyu Lu
Knowing Is Not Telling: Identity Ossification in LLM Representations of Trans-border Communities
Minglu Sun, Lan Chen, Hang Jiang