Rational Design Rights Ignorance

American Business Law Journal

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 573-605

  Orozco, David ^a  

^a MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449726548     PISSN: 00027766     EISSN: 17441714     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1714.2009.01085.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Marcus Reitzig, How Executives Can Enhance IP Strategy and Performance, 49 MIT Sloan Mgmt. Rev. 37, 38 43 (2007).
2. Constance E. Bagley, Winning Legally: The Value of Legal Astuteness, 33 Acad. Mgmt. Rev. 378, 378 (2008).
3. Robert P. Merges, A New Dynamism in the Public Domain, 71 U. Chi. L. Rev. 185, 185 94 (2004)
4. Gary P. Pisano David J. Teece, How to Capture Value from Innovation: Shaping Intellectual Property and Industry Architecture, 50 Cal. Mgmt. Rev. 278, 282 83 (2007).
5. Karl N. Llewellyn, A Realistic Jurisprudence - The Next Step, 30 Colum. L. Rev. 431, 443 45 (1930).
6. Gideon Parchomovsky Peter Siegelman, Towards an Integrated Theory of Intellectual Property, 88 Va. L. Rev. 1455, 1460 61 (2002)
7. Ian Ayres Paul Klemperer, Limiting Patentee's Market Power Without Reducing Innovation Incentives: The Perverse Benefits of Uncertainty and Non-Injunctive Remedies, 97 Mich. L. Rev. 985 (1999).
8. Peter H. Farquhar, Managing Brand Equity, 30 J. Adv. Res. 7, 7 10 (1990).
9. Viva R. Moffat, Mutant Copyrights and Backdoor Patents: The Problem of Overlapping Intellectual Property Protection, 19 Berkeley Tech L.J. 1473, 1510 (2004)
10. Nathan Machin, Prospective Utility: A New Interpretation of the Utility Requirement of Section 101 of the Patent Act, 87 Cal. L. Rev. 421, 426 (1999).
11. Daniel R. Cahoy, An Incrementalist Approach to Patent Reform Policy, 9 N.Y.U. J. Leg. & Pub. Pol. 587, 658 (2005/2006)
12. Perry J. Saidman, Egyptian Goddess Exposed!: But not in the Buff(er), 90 J. Pat. & Trademark Off. Soc'y 859, 884 85 (2008).
13. Jonathan E. Moskin, The Shape of Things to Come - Emerging Theories of Design Protection, 92 Trademark Rep. 681, 691 (2002)
14. Kevin Lane Keller, Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity, 57 J. Marketing 1, 4 (1993).
15. Barton Beebe, The Semiotic Analysis of Trademark Law, 51 UCLA L. Rev. 621 (2004).
16. Ross Petty, Flavor Trademark Hard for the TTAB to Swallow, 36 J. Acad. Mktg. Sci. 437, 437 38 (2008).
17. Lynda Oswald, When is a Name Not a Name? Descriptive vs. Suggestive Marks, 33 J. Acad. Mktg. Sci. 117, 118 (2005).
18. Dorothy Cohen, Trademark Strategy, 50 J. Marketing 61, 62 (1986).
19. Sidney A. Diamond, Properly Used, Trademarks are Forever, 68 A.B.A. J. 1575, 1575 (1982).
20. Jay Barney, Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, 17 J. Mgmt. 99, 105 12 (1991).
21. Gerda Gemser Mark A. A. M. Leenders, How Integrating Industrial Design in the Product Development Process Impacts on Company Performance, 18 J. Prod. Innov. Mgmt. 28, 29 (2001).
22. Julie H. Hertenstein et al., The Impact of Industrial Design on Corporate Financial Performance, 22 J. Prod. Innov. Mgmt. 3, 4 (2005).
23. Marvin Berkowitz, Product Shape as a Design Innovation Strategy, 4 J. Prod. Innov. Mgmt. 274, 274 75 (1987).
24. Dana Beldiman, Protecting the Form But Not the Function: Is U.S. Law Ready for a New Model?, 20 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 529, 541 42 (2004).
25. Karl T. Ulrich Scott Pearson, Assessing the Importance of Design through Product Archaeology, 44 Mgmt. Sci. 352, 352 (1998).
26. Robert C. Bird, The Impact of the Mosley Decision on Trademark Dilution Law, 26 J. Pub. Pol. & Mktg. 102, 102 04 (2007)
27. Robert A. Peterson et al., Trademark Dilution and the Practice of Marketing, 27 J. Acad. Mktg. Sci. 255, 255 (1999).
28. Richard L. Daft Robert H. Lengel, Organizational Information Requirements Media Richness and Structural Design, 32 Mgmt. Sci. 554, 564 (1986).