Today, the Supreme Court announced its decision in the case Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, affirming the United States Patent and Trademark Office over two challenges to the agency's post-grant procedure for reviewing patents, called inter partes review. Public Knowledge filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the USPTO in this case.
Imagine a tire on a fancy Tesla, a highly technical, complex car made from myriad technological contributions and likely subject to thousands of patents. Many of those patents cover the technologies that make the car run, while others, design patents, cover only the ornamental designs. Generally, a tire's tread pattern is several straight lines that cross each other - and could be covered by a design patent. The tire itself is a small part of the final car, and the role the tread plays in the car’s value is minimal.
Today, Public Knowledge joined four other organizations in filing an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in the Samsung v. Apple case. The case concerns a recent federal appellate court decision in the Apple-Samsung smartphone patent litigation. The Supreme Court will review that appellate court's holding that an infringer of a design patent must pay all profits made on the infringing product.
Today, Public Knowledge (PK) publishes a substantive analysis of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). While PK does not take a position on whether trade agreements in general are good or bad as a matter of public policy, we do evaluate whether individual trade agreements affect PK’s ability to promote its mission. If an agreement benefits our policy goals we will support it, and if it undermines our mission we will oppose it. It is true, however, that PK has consistently decried the lack of openness and transparency surrounding the negotiation of trade agreements and has recommended significant reforms to the process of deliberating trade policy to give the public a more meaningful voice in evaluating the elements of trade agreements before they are completed.