Categories
IPPI News

IPPI 2025 Fall Progress Report


IPPI Fall 2025 Progress Report (June – August 2025)

Navigation

IPPI Hosted and Co-Hosted Events

News & Speaking Engagements

Scholarship & Other Writing


Greetings from IPPI Research Professor & Executive Director Joshua Kresh

I am happy to report a productive summer quarter marked by significant milestones and successful new initiatives that have strengthened our institute’s global research network and educational impact.

In June, we launched the WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP in partnership with both the World Intellectual Property Organization and The University of Akron School of Law, bringing together an exceptional cohort of both U.S. and international students. This program builds on our tradition of fostering cross-border intellectual property education, and we are excited to continue the program going forward.

In August, with Geneva Network, we hosted our first Stevens International Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, which convened a distinguished network of international scholars and practitioners. This foundational event has created promising opportunities for ongoing research partnerships and collaboration in the coming years.

Although IPPI September activities will be featured in December’s Winter Progress Report, I’m pleased to note a few highlights from this past month, as well:

  • Professor Mark Schultz participated in the September 10-12 EPIP Annual Conference 2025 in Antwerp, Belgium. He also spoke at the September 23 GTIPA Summit 2025 and co-organized and participated in a September 24 Life Sciences Innovation Forum, all in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • IPPI hosted our first Edison Fellowship meeting on site at The University of Akron’s School of Law in Ohio.
  • Additionally, in August, Professor Emily Michiko Morris and I recorded a podcast with Leerink Partners that was published this past month.

More details are to follow about these and other events in our next update.

As we transition into fall, we are actively developing our next series of roundtables focusing on Life Sciences, High Tech, and Copyright issues, with several events planned through the winter months. We are also excited to announce preliminary planning for our first Winter Institute, scheduled for February 26, 2026, in Florida.

In addition, several scholarly publications and brief commentary pieces are in development and will be released throughout the fall quarter. Finally, for any junior academics or for others interested in academic writing, we will be opening the next round of our Edison Fellowship very soon.

Best regards,

Joshua Kresh
Research Professor & Executive Director
IPPI: The IP Policy Institute
The University of Akron School of Law
Washington, D.C.


IPPI Hosted & Co-Hosted Events

These are events either hosted or co-hosted by the members of the IPPI team and our affiliates from June through August 2025.

(Virtual) WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
From June 2-13, IPPI partnered with the World Intellectual Property Organization for the 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on Intellectual Property. As WIPO’s only U.S.-based Summer School, this annual program is a two-week, online course that focuses on IP law in the United States of America. The program consists of lectures, case studies, simulation exercises, and group discussions on selected IP topics, with an orientation towards the interface between IP and other disciplines. This year, we were honored to have over thirty students—law students, young professionals, and more—hailing from Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Egypt, Finland, India, Italy, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, the People’s Republic of China, Peru, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, Switzerland, Tunisia, Türkiye, the UAE, and the United States.

(Virtual) Panel on “Investing in Ideas: The Power of Public Research”

On June 11, as part of the WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP, IPPI and IPPI Institutional Partner USIPA co-hosted an open-to-the-public webinar on public funding for universities, a topic that has become increasingly important. This panel explored basic research’s role in driving innovation and educating our future. Our speakers—including panelists Kate Hudson (AAU),  Catalina Isaza Falla (INNMETEC), Dr. Mark Rohrbaugh (Acierto Innovations Consulting; Formerly NIH; a 2025 recipient of the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s American Innovator Award), Stephen J. Susalka (AUTM), and moderator Joshua Kresh—discussed both the broader landscape and specific examples of professors whose research has led to publicly accessible innovations and tangible real-world impact.

July Events in Geneva, Switzerland

  • On July 7, IPPI partnered with GLIPA to co-host a Reception to mark the start of the 2025 WIPO General Assemblies. Professors Mark Schultz and Emily Michiko Morris co-organized and participated in the event on behalf of IPPI.
  • On July 9, IPPI partnered with the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) and Innovation Council to co-host an in-person Lunchtime Discussion on Gender and IP. Participants discussed forthcoming guidance for IP offices working to expand women’s access to the IP system and identified promising policies and practices from the countries represented—covering the IP offices of Canada, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, India, Nigeria, the Philippines, the United Kingdom, and the United States, as well as the European Patent Office—with the goal of publishing these as case studies. Professors Mark Schultz and Emily Michiko Morris co-organized and participated in the event on behalf of IPPI.
  • On July 10, IPPI partnered with Geneva Network, ITIF, and Innovation Council to host an Innovate4Health Luncheon Discussion in tandem with the WIPO General Assemblies. The purpose of this discussion was to unpack the contribution of IP to health innovation, and the broad diffusion of health technologies, in emerging countries. Exciting case studies were featured from various countries—Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, India, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, and Uganda—showcasing how entrepreneurs from emerging economies are solving global health challenges and bringing life-saving innovations to market with the help of IP. A discussion was also featured on how new case studies from other countries can be shared in future editions to help promote local innovation (read Innovate4Health’s 2024 edition). The lunch was hosted by Jennifer Brant (Innovation Council), Stephen Ezell (ITIF), and Professors Mark Schultz and Emily Michiko Morris (IPPI). Confirmed attendees included WIPO Assistant Director General Marco Aleman.

(Hybrid) The Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation
On August 5, IPPI and Geneva Network co-hosted the inaugural Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation in Washington, D.C., convening newly invited members of the Global Research Network on Life Sciences Innovation.

  • The Global Research Network on Life Sciences Innovation: This new network connects scholars from the United States, Latin America, South and Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Africa, and Europe to share research and ideas about designing institutions that foster innovation in intellectual property and life sciences. Members will meet regularly online and occasionally in person to workshop papers, exchange knowledge, and collaborate on research projects.
  • Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation: The Washington, D.C. roundtable on August 5 featured moderated discussions under the Chatham House Rule, covering:
    • Innovation law and economics perspectives in life sciences;
    • Fostering worldwide participation in life sciences R&D, clinical trials, and biopharma manufacturing;
    • Access to medicines and innovation; and
    • Takeaways and future research directions.

Group photo of August 5 Stevens Roundtable participants in meeting room

Group photo of August 5 Stevens Roundtable participants in meeting room
Participants of the inaugural Stevens Roundtable pose for group photos on August 5 in Washington, D.C.

News & Speaking Engagements

These are news and speaking engagements for the members of the IPPI team and our affiliates from June through August 2025.

Policy Brief & Fact Sheet
This July, IPPI published two related pieces co-written by Dr. Ani Harutyunyan and Dr. William Matcham: a policy brief on “Measuring Patent Quality and Reducing the Backlog at the USPTO” and a fact sheet, “Evidence on U.S. Patent Quality and Reforms to Reduce Patent Application Backlogs.” There has been much discussion about both patent quality and the current backlog, along with possible ways to improve one or the other. This policy brief presents recent empirical findings on patent quality, highlights the limitations of certain metrics as a measure of patent quality, and proposes viable reforms aimed at reducing application backlogs while maintaining high patent quality. (Dr. Harutyunyan is an IPPI Practitioner in Residence, Dr. Matcham is an IPPI Scholar, and both are former Edison Fellows.)

Welcome to IPPI’s Newest Affiliates

  • In July, IPPI welcomed Professor Sandra Aistars as Distinguished Counselor in Residence and Professor of Law. Professor Aistars brings invaluable expertise and esteemed experience to IPPI, representing a significant strengthening of the copyright scholarship capabilities and reinforcing IPPI’s commitment to advancing IP policy research and education. IPPI is thrilled to welcome her and looks forward to her insights, leadership, and scholarly contributions.
  • In July, IPPI welcomed Dr. Michael D. Smith (J. Erik Jonsson Professor of Information Technology and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University’s Heinz College) as a Senior Scholar.
  • In August, Professor Bruce Boyden (Associate Professor of Law, Marquette University Law School) joined IPPI as a Senior Scholar.

Comments & Testimony

  • On June 30, IPPI Advisory Board Member Dr. Hans Sauer (Deputy General Counsel, VP for IP, BIO) spoke on the panel “Anticompetitive Conduct to Delay, and Forestall Competition from Lower-Priced Alternatives” as part of a U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division series of Listening Sessions on Lowering Americans’ Drug Prices Through Competition.
  • On July 16, Professor Bhamati Viswanathan and Dr. Michael D. Smith testified at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism on “Too Big to Prosecute?: Examining the AI Industry’s Mass Ingestion of Copyrighted Works for AI Training.” (Recording of the hearing | Dr. Viswanathan’s & Dr. Smith’s written testimonies are also available)

Amicus Brief
Signatories for an August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Former Officials, and Academic Scholars” in Arbutus v. Moderna included IPPI Advisory Board Member Judge Paul Michel (Ret.); IPPI Associate Faculty Chair, Senior Fellow for Life Sciences, and Senior Scholar Professor Emily Michiko Morris; IPPI Senior Fellow for Innovation Policy and Senior Scholar Professor Kristen Osenga; IPPI Senior Scholars Professor Jonathan Barnett, Daniel Cahoy, Adam MacLeod, and Lateef Mtima; and IPPI Scholar Dr. Bowman Heiden.

* * *

Dr. Kristina M. L. Acri, née Lybecker (IPPI Senior Scholar; John L. Knight Chair of Economics and Professor of Economics, Colorado College)

  • On August 5, participated in the inaugural, international Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, co-hosted on August 5 in Washington, D.C. by IPPI and Geneva Network

Sandra Aistars (Distinguished Counselor in Residence and Professor of Law)

  • In July, joined IPPI as Distinguished Counselor in Residence and Professor of Law

Jonathan Barnett (IPPI Senior Scholar; Torrey H. Webb Professor of Law, USC Gould School of Law)

  • Taught the session “Overview and Economics of Intellectual Property” during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Matt Blaszczyk (IPPI 2025-2026 Edison Fellow; Research Fellow in Law and Mobility, University of Michigan Law School)

  • On June 3, was a presenter at Sh[AI]rk Tank: AI & Law Pitches at the University of Texas Law School
  • Presented paper Posthuman Copyright: Copyright, AI, and Legitimacy for the session “Copyright and the Ai Revolution: Governance, Rights, and Creativity” at IP Researchers Europe (IPRE) Conference 2025, which was hosted from June 19-20 by the University of Geneva, WIPO, and WTO
  • In July, was a visiting scholar for a research stay at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in Munich, Germany
  • On July 8, participated in the AALS Section on Intellectual Property Summer Workshop
  • Presented paper Posthuman Copyright: Copyright, AI, and Legitimacy in a session on IP theory at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference (IPSC) 2025 Conference, held in Chicago, Illinois, from August 7-8
  • Was quoted in August 5 Front Office Sports article “Mammoth vs. Mammoth: NHL Team Strikes First in Trademark Feud”
  • Attended the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference (IPSC) hosted at DePaul University College of Law from August 7-8
  • Was interviewed for August 22 MLex piece “Matt Blaszczyk takes on copyright’s human authorship requirement in age of AI”
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Bruce Boyden (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Professor of Law, Marquette University Law School)

Jennifer Brant (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; CEO & Founder, Innovation Insights)

  • Co-organized and participated in July 7 reception co-hosted by IPPI and GLIPA; July 9 Lunchtime Discussion on Gender and IP co-hosted by IPPI, ITIF, and Innovation Council in Geneva, Switzerland; and July 10 Innovate4Health Luncheon Discussion 

Daniel R. Cahoy (IPPI Senior Scholar; Robert G. and Caroline Schwartz Professor & Chair of the Risk Management Department, The Pennsylvania State University’s Smeal College of Business)

  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna

Mark Cohen (IPPI Senior Fellow for China IP & Scholar; China IP Strategies, LLC)

  • On June 5, taught the session “Special Innovation Lecture – WTO-Related Issues and the Trump Trade War” during IPPI’s 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • On June 24, spoke on the panel “The Key Role of Reliable IPRs and the Rule of Law in Promoting Global Technological Leadership” at the USC Gould School of Law’s Center for Transnational Business and Law (CTBL) conference on “U.S. Global Technological Leadership, Intellectual Property Rights, and U.S. National Security.” (Read more on the China IPR blog)
  • On August 5, participated in the inaugural, international Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, co-hosted on August 5 in Washington, D.C. by IPPI and Geneva Network
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Gerardo Con Díaz (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor, Science and Technology Studies, University of California, Davis College of Letters and Science)

Dr. Charles Delmotte (IPPI Scholar; Assistant Professor of Law, Michigan State University College of Law)

  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Michael Doane (IPPI Scholar; Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, The University of Akron School of Law; 2024-2025 Edison Fellow)

  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Tabrez Ebrahim (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor of Law at Lewis & Clark Law School)

Gillian Fenton, Esq., CLP (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Founder and Managing Director, LST Strategies LLC)

  • In June, published articleA Proposal Regarding the Domestic Manufacturing Requirement of the Bayh-Dole Act” in Les Nouvelles, the journal of the Licensing Executives Society International (LES)
  • In June, co-taught Module 2 of the LES IP Licensing Basics professional development course (Module 2 = IP Commercialization)
  • On June 4, attended the annual “Faces of American Innovation” event hosted by the Bayh-Dole Coalition in Washington, D.C.
  • On June 16-19, attended the BIO International Convention in Boston, MA
  • Was an invited advisor to the Board of LES USA & Canada at their annual strategic planning meeting on June 26
  • In July, attended Bayh-Dole Coalition workshop on policy proposals relating to the Bayh-Dole Act’s domestic manufacturing requirement
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Joseph Fishman (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Vanderbilt University Law School)

Jon M. Garon (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Dean for Technology and Innovation; Director, Goodwin Program for Society, Technology, and the Law; and Professor of Law, Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law)

  • On June 12, taught the session “Innovation, AI, and IP Law” during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • On June 26, served as a panelist for the ABA Business Law Section course “Innovation, AI, and IP Law”
  • In June, joined Operation Shamrock, a grassroots outreach organization providing community education on cybercrimes, human trafficking, and internet-based financial and personal harms
  • In June, was reappointed as affiliated faculty at UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law
  • In July, spoke on the ABA-IPL Committee on Dramatic and Visual Works panel “Recent AI Litigation Update “
  • In July, was appointed as Associate Dean for Technology and Innovation at NSU Shepard Broad College of Law
  • In July, was appointed as a Member of the LSAC Product Strategy and Innovation Committee
  • At the Southeastern Association of Law Schools SEALS 2025 Conference, hosted in Florida from July 27-August 2, served as a discussant for the sessions “Learning from Students with Learning Differences: Strategizing to Support and Engage All Students,” “Online Education Basics,” “From Standards to Practices—The Expectations for Online Courses and Programs,” “SEALS Faculty Recruitment Portal: A Kinder, Gentler Faculty Recruitment Process,” “Online and Hybrid Learning Pedagogy Best Practices and Standards Development,” and “The Demise of College Sports: Threatening the Financial Integrity of the Education Enterprise”; and moderated the sessions “Using Partnerships and Alliances to Improve Legal Education’s Reach” and “Now that AI is Here: Lessons in Legal Education and the Practice of Law.”
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Michael Goodyear (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor at New York Law School)

  • On June 5, spoke at a roundtable hosted by the USPTO on the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) draft voluntary guidelines for countering illicit trade in counterfeit goods on online marketplaces
  • On June 16, submitted formal comments to the USPTO regarding the OECD’s draft online marketplace guidelines for countering illicit trade in counterfeit goods, supporting the need for greater communication between platforms and stakeholders while cautioning that imposing overly formal rules may constrain beneficial experimentation in user trademark infringement policies and practices by platforms
  • On July 1, started a new position as an Associate Professor at New York Law School, where he will be teaching Copyright Law this fall. Congratulations!
  • On July 14, attended and presented a lightning talk on “Licensing for Whom?” at the Summer Institute on Law and AI, hosted in Airlie, Virginia by the Institute for Law & AI
  • On July 29, article Common Law Notice-and-Takedown was featured by World Trademark Review
  • On July 31, presented draft paper “Disentangling Indigenous Authenticity” at the Junior Intellectual Property Scholars Association Workshop at the University of Wisconsin Law School
  • Presented paper Dignity and Deepfakes in a session on digital society at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference (IPSC) 2025 Conference, held in Chicago, Illinois, from August 7-8
  • On August 8, presented paper “Dignity and Deepfakes” at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conferenceat DePaul University College of Law
  • Published August 14 Boston Globe op-ed “How a Century-Old Legal Principle Could Rid the Internet of Deepfakes”
  • On August 16, recorded an episode “on AI, IP, Copyright, and the Law” for the Scaling Laws Podcast with Lawfare and the University of Texas School of Law
  • On August 27, was a guest speaker and presented paper Dignity and Deepfakes for the AI, Ethics, and the Law Seminar at Loyola University Chicago School of Law
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

David Grossman (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Senior Director of Technology Transfer & Industry Collaboration, Office of Technology Transfer, George Mason University)

  • On June 11, taught the interactive simulation session “Transfer of Technology and Licensing” during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP

Dr. Ani Harutyunyan (IPPI Practitioner in Residence)

  • The Sunwater Institute’s 2024 report Patent Quality in the United States: Findings and Suggestions for Policymakers—co-authored by Dr. Harutyunyan, IPPI Scholar Dr. William Matcham, et al—was cited in the USPTO’s May 8, 2025, response to the GAO Report Intellectual Property: Patent Office Should Strengthen Its Efforts to Address Persistent Examination and Quality Challenges and in May 27 IPWatchdog post “Patent Blame Game: Are 70% of U.S. Patents Really Defective? | IPWatchdog Unleashed
  • In July, published two IPPI policy pieces with Dr. William Matcham (See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below)

Dr. Bowman Heiden (IPPI Scholar; Co-Director, Center for Intellectual Property (CIP), University of Gothenburg, Visiting Professor, University of California, Berkeley)

  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna
  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Zac Henderson (IPPI 2025-2026 Edison Fellow; Visiting Assistant Professor and Shashi and Dipanjan “DJ” Deb Faculty Scholar; Senior Research Scholar, Center for Innovation (C4i); AI Law & Innovation Institute, UC Law San Francisco (formerly UC Hastings))

  • Was invited to speak on the panel “AI and the Tech Frontier” at the 14th Annual Transatlantic Law Forum, hosted in Oslo, Norway, from June 19-21 by George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School’s Law & Economics Center
  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Camilla A. Hrdy (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School)

  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Joshua Kresh (Research Professor & Executive Director, IPPI, The University of Akron School of Law)

  • In June, served as instructor of record for and led the subject-matter planning for IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP. Mr. Kresh also moderated the panel “The Role of IP Institutions in the Global IP System,” co-taught the lecture “Enforcing Rights: U.S. Patent Litigation,” moderated the panel “Patents in the Innovation Industries,” hosted a fireside chat with The Hon. Andrei Iancu, moderated a public panel on “Investing in Ideas: The Power of Public Research,” and co-taught the session “IP Office Hours.” [See the Summer School agenda for speakers and more details]
  • On June 9, attended Bayh-Dole Coalition events—the third annual American Innovator Award ceremony, the Bayh-Dole 45th Anniversary celebration, and the “Faces of American Innovation” Capitol Hill report briefing—in Washington, D.C.
  • On June 24, attended the USC Gould School of Law’s CTLB Conference: U.S. Global Technological Leadership, Intellectual Property Rights, and U.S. National Security in Washington, D.C.
  • On June 24, attended U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center event “Unlocking Creativity: The Power and Promise of Copyright” in Washington, D.C.
  • Co-led the subject-matter planning for and participated in the August 5 inaugural, international Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, co-hosted on August 5 in Washington, D.C. by IPPI and Geneva Network

Dr. John Liddicoat (IPPI Scholar; Senior Research Associate and Affiliated Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge)

  • Spoke on “The Republic of Translational Medicine” at the Workshop on Changing Politics and Economics of the Pharmaceutical Sector in Sheffield, UK, on June 23 and at the 43rd ATRIP Annual Congress in Copenhagen, Denmark, on June 24
  • On June 27, spoke on “Repurposing, the Republic of Translational Medicine and Other Adventures” at the Inter-CeBIL Retreat 2025 in Copenhagen, Denmark
  • In August, was named to the European Medicines Agency’s drafting group for best practices on using European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) in research (the EMA produces EPARs whenever it evaluates medicines)

Erika Lietzan (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, William H. Pittman Professor of Law & Timothy J. Heinsz Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law)

  • This summer, was named Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development at the University of Missouri School of Law

Adam MacLeod (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Faulkner University, Thomas Goode Jones School of Law; Research Fellow, Center for Religion, Culture, and Democracy)

  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna

Dr. William Matcham (IPPI Scholar; Assistant Professor (Lecturer) of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London)

  • The Sunwater Institute’s 2024 report Patent Quality in the United States: Findings and Suggestions for Policymakers—co-authored by Dr. Matcham, IPPI Practitioner in Residence Dr. Ani Harutyunyan, et al—was cited in the USPTO’s May 8, 2025, response to the GAO Report Intellectual Property: Patent Office Should Strengthen Its Efforts to Address Persistent Examination and Quality Challenges and in May 27 IPWatchdog post “Patent Blame Game: Are 70% of U.S. Patents Really Defective? | IPWatchdog Unleashed
  • In July, published two IPPI policy pieces with Dr. Ani Harutyunyan (See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below)
  • On July 14, presented article Screening Property Rights for Innovation, co-written with Mark Schankerman, at the Boston University IP Day Conference

Emily Michiko Morris (IPPI Associate Faculty Chair, Senior for Life Sciences, and Senior Scholar; 2021-2022 Edison Fellow; David L. Brennan Endowed Chair, Professor, and Associate Director of the Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology, University of Akron School of Law)

  • On June 5, taught the session “IP Issues in Life Sciences R&D and Commercialization” during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • From June 1-13, participated in the George Mason University Law & Economics Center (LEC)’s Seventeenth Law Institute for Economics Professors and Thirty-Fifth Economics Institute for Law Professors
  • As of this July, Professor Morris is a full professor at The University of Akron School of Law—congratulations!
  • Co-organized and participated in July 7 reception co-hosted by IPPI and GLIPA; July 9 Lunchtime Discussion on Gender and IP co-hosted by IPPI, ITIF, and Innovation Council in Geneva, Switzerland; and July 10 Innovate4Health Luncheon Discussion
  • Co-led the subject-matter planning for and participated in the August 5 inaugural, international Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, co-hosted on August 5 in Washington, D.C. by IPPI and Geneva Network
  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna

Lateef Mtima (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law; Founder and Director, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice (IIPSJ))

  • On June 12, taught the session “Case Study: Bringing Traditional Knowledge to Global Markets for the Benefit of Local Communities” during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna

Loren Mulraine (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Director of Music and Entertainment Law Studies, Belmont University – College of Law)

  • Was featured in September 5 Spencer Fance piece “Loren Mulraine Examines Fair Use Law for CPIP Summer IP Institute”

Michael D. Murray (IPPI Senior Scholar; Spears Gilbert Professor of Law, University of Kentucky)

  • Was invited by the Kentucky Bar Association AI subcommittee to address the Annual Kentucky Bar Association Convention on the topic of “Technology in the Courtroom: Expectation, Best Practices, and Navigating Deepfakes” on June 5
  • As of this July, Professor Murray is a full professor at the University of Kentucky J. David Rosenberg College of Law and has been promoted to a Senior Scholar with IPPI. Congratulations!

Kristen Jakobsen Osenga (IPPI Senior Fellow for Innovation Policy & Senior Scholar; Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar and Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law)

  • With IPPI Advisory Board Member Andrei Iancu, participated in a July 17 Federalist Society Forum webinar “The Case for RESTORE? Injunctions, Patents, and the Future of Innovation”
  • Signed August 22 “Amicus Brief of 16 Former Judges, Officials, and Academic Scholars in Arbutus v. Moderna

Sean A. Pager (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law; Associate Director, Intellectual Property, Information & Communications Law Program (IPIC), Michigan State University College of Law)

  • On June 23, presented paper The Arc of Copyright is Long, But It Bends Toward Justice at the 2025 International Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property (ATRIP) Congress at the University of Copenhagen
  • On June 14, paper The Cost of Music: Has Digitization Made Copyright Obsolete?, co-authored with Professor Eric Priest, was presented by assigned commentator Professor Guy Rub (Temple University Beasley School of Law) for Professor Pager’s response at the Copyright Scholarship Roundtable at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
  • Presented paper Who Is Liable for Infringing Generative AI Output? in a session on copyright and AI at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference (IPSC) 2025 Conference, hosted by the Center for Intellectual Property Law & Information Technology (CIPLIT®) at DePaul University College of Law in Chicago, Illinois, from August 7-8

Douglas Park (IPPI Research Fellow; Research Fellow, Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology; Visiting Research Assistant Professor, The University of Akron School of Law)

  • Supported the subject-matter planning for and participated in the August 5 inaugural, international Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, co-hosted on August 5 in Washington, D.C. by IPPI and Geneva Network

Eric Priest (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Professor and Faculty Director, Asian Studies, Law, Law-JD, University of Oregon School of Law)

  • On June 10, taught the session “Securing & Using Copyright Protection Globally” during the 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP, hosted virtually by IPPI
  • Paper The Cost of Music: Has Digitization Made Copyright Obsolete?, co-authored with Professor Eric Priest, was presented by assigned commentator Guy Rub at the June 14 Copyright Scholarship Roundtable at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
  • On July 8, moderated the AALS Section on Intellectual Property Summer Workshop

Dr. Alexander Raskovich (IPPI Senior Economist)

  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Michael Risch (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law)

  • On June 2, taught the session “Fundamentals of U.S. Patent Law” during the 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP, hosted virtually by IPPI
  • Presented on paper The Double Patenting Puzzle at the June 7 IPIL National Conference’s Symposium by the University of Houston Law Center’s Institute for Intellectual Property & Information Law and at the June 28 Tsai Center for Law, Science and Innovation’s Patent Scholar Summit at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX
  • Presented paper Pharma Continuation Stories in a session on patents and pharmaceuticals at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference (IPSC) 2025 Conference, held in Chicago, Illinois, from August 7-8
  • On August 8, presented paper Orange Book Stories at the IP Scholars Conference at DePaul Law School
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Alexandra Jane Roberts (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law and Media & Faculty Director, Center for Law, Information and Creativity (CLIC), Northeastern University School of Law)

  • Was quoted in June 24 Fast Company article “io vs. iyO: The way your company sounds really does matter”
  • On July 2, appeared on Good Morning America to discuss the lawsuit between Lululemon and Costco
  • Was quoted about Lululemon’s dupe lawsuit against Costco by the Associated Press News (July 2), CBC Toronto (July 11), and  New York Post (July 2)
  • Was quoted in July 7 GOLF article “Augusta National-branded coffee? The club has something brewing” about a pending trademark application
  • Was quoted in July 22 Ars Technicaarticle “Toy company may regret coming for ‘Sylvanian Drama’ TikToker, experts say” about a copyright and trademark dispute involving Calico Critters
  • Was quoted in The Verge’s July 22 long-form piece “Knock It Off!” on dupes
  • Was interviewed by NPR 1Afor July 29 segment “Pricey products and the dilemma of ‘dupes’”
  • In July, was quoted in 2025 summer issue of Northeastern Law Magazine’s cover story “Pyramid Schemes and Pipe Dreams,” which discussed Professor Roberts’ work on multi-level marketing
  • Presented paper Litigating Personal Brand: Intellectual Property & the Construction of Self in a session on trademarks at the Intellectual Property Scholars Conference (IPSC) 2025 Conference, held in Chicago, Illinois, from August 7-8
  • In August, gave a WGBH radio interview about a trademark dispute between Baylor University and Boston University
  • See also “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Zvi S. Rosen (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor, University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law)

  • On June 12, taught the session “Copyright in the Digital World” during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • In July, moderated a Federalist Society webinar on “AI Training vs. Copyright Law: Updates from the Copyright Office and the Courts” (view the recording)
  • On August 12, spoke on the Federalist Society webinar panel “Legislative or Executive? The Curious Case of the Library of Congress”

Mark F. Schultz (IPPI Faculty Chair & Senior Scholar; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Chair in Intellectual Property Law, University of Akron School of Law; Director, Center for Intellectual Property Law and Technology)

  • In June, taught the sessions “Fundamentals of Trade Secrets,” “The Real-World Value of Trade Secrets in a Global Innovation Economy,” “Best Practices for Protecting Trade Secrets,” and “Fundamentals of Copyright”—as well as moderating the panel “Trade Secrets in Global Business” with panelists Victoria Cundiff (University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School), Dean Harts (3M), Jim Pooley (James Pooley, PLC; former Deputy Director General, WIPO), and Dick Thurston (RILT Global Consulting LLC)—during IPPI’s June 2025 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on IP
  • Co-organized and participated in July 7 reception co-hosted by IPPI and GLIPA; July 9 Lunchtime Discussion on Gender and IP co-hosted by IPPI, ITIF, and Innovation Council in Geneva, Switzerland; and July 10 Innovate4Health Luncheon Discussion
  • Co-led the subject-matter planning for and participated in the August 5 inaugural, international Stevens Roundtable on Life Sciences Innovation, co-hosted on August 5 in Washington, D.C. by IPPI and Geneva Network

Dr. Nicola Searle (IPPI Scholar; Reader (Associate Professor), Institute for Cultural and Creative Entrepreneurship (ICCE), Goldsmiths, University of London)

  • In July, was appointed to the UK Government’s Department of Culture, Media & Sport College of Experts
  • Was interviewed by Research Professional News for July 9 article “Focus on national security ‘will bring chilling effect’ to UK research” about her research on the challenges of supporting innovation in the context of research security
  • See “Scholarship & Other Writing” section below

Amy Semet (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor, University at Buffalo School of Law)

Brenda Simon (IPPI Senior Scholar; ProFlowers Professor of Internet Studies and Professor of Law, California Western School of Law)

Dr. Michael D. Smith (IPPI Senior Scholar; J. Erik Jonsson Professor of Information Technology and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University’s Heinz College)

  • In July, joined IPPI as a Senior Scholar
  • On July 16, testified at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism on “Too Big to Prosecute?: Examining the AI Industry’s Mass Ingestion of Copyrighted Works for AI Training”

Saurabh Vishnubhakat (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Yeshiva University Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law)

Dr. Bhamati Viswanathan (IPPI Scholar; Fellow, Columbia Law School, Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts; Senior Visitor, University of Cambridge Faculty of Law)

  • Was quoted in June 26 Bloomberg Law article “AI Fair Use Loss to Meta Shows Copyright Plaintiffs How to Win”
  • Congratulations to Dr. Viswanathan for joining the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts at Columbia University Law School as a Non-Resident Fellow this July! She will also be a Senior Visitor with the University of Cabridge Faculty of Law in the coming year.
  • On July 16, testified at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism on “Too Big to Prosecute?: Examining the AI Industry’s Mass Ingestion of Copyrighted Works for AI Training”
  • Was quoted by ASCAP in its July 17 “Statement of The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism”
  • On July 23, spoke on AI and copyright on WBUR’s Morning Edition segment “Wave of copyright lawsuits hit AI companies like Cambridge-based Suno”

Scholarship & Other Writing

These are articles and other pieces written by members of the IPPI team or our affiliates from June through August 2025.

Jonathan Barnett, The Free Content Illusion (August 27, 2025). Journal of Intellectual Property Law (2026), USC CLASS Research Paper No. 2518

Matt Blaszczyk, Beyond Human-Centric Rhetoric, Tech Policy Press (forthcoming, Aug. 2025)

Matt Blaszczyk, Copyright Doctrine Before the Tribunal of Science: A Response to Professor Silbey, 72(1) Journal of the Copyright Society 142

Matt Blaszczyk, Posthuman Copyright: AI, Copyright, and Legitimacy (August 01, 2025) [Also promoted on the Private Law Theory blog]

Julie A. Carlson and Alexander Raskovich, Collaborative Investment, Repeat Dealing and Governance in 3GPP (May 31, 2025)

Mark A. Cohen, China’s Many Faces of FRAND, 47 European Intellectual Property Review, Issue 7 (2025) *Mark Cohen is a 2024-2025 IPPI Edison Fellow. The research and writing of this paper were supported by the Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship.

Mark Cohen, “The ‘Five Big Offices’ Meet – Minus One,” China IPR (June 27, 2025)

Mark Cohen, “The WTO’s Arbitral Decision on Chinese SEP Practices in DS/611: Getting Closer to the Right Kind of Decision,” China IPR (July 26, 2025)

Gerardo Con Díaz, Everyone Breaks These Laws: How Copyrights Made the Online World, Yale University Press (2025) [Available for purchase at link and from other book retailers]

Charles Delmotte, Equality Before Tax Law, Washington and Lee Law Review Vol. 83:2, 2026 (Forthcoming)

Michael Doane, “TPLFA: Protecting Predatory Infringers,” IPPI Blog (August 20, 2025)

Sarah Fackrell & Alexandra J. Roberts, “Analyzing the Lululemon v. Costco Dupe Suit (Guest Blog Post),” Technology & Marketing Law Blog (July 9, 2025)

Gillian M. Fenton, A Proposal Regarding the Domestic Manufacturing Requirement of the Bayh-Dole Actles Nouvelles, Vol. LX, No. 1, pp. 127-131; June 2025.

Jon M. Garon, Artificial Intelligence Law and Regulation in a Nutshell, Nutshells (West Academic Publishing, 2025)

Jon Garon, Encyclopedia Entry: “Intellectual Property Rights in the Metaverse,” Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence and the Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2025) (forthcoming)

Jon M. Garon, ed., The Law of Digital Content (ABA Publishing, 2025)

Michael Goodyear, Common Law Notice-and-Takedown (March 20, 2025). NYU J. Intell. Prop. & Ent. L., Forthcoming

Michael P. Goodyear, “How a century-old legal principle could rid the internet of deepfakes,” The Boston Globe (August 14, 2025)

Ani Harutyunyan & William Matcham, Fact Sheet: “Evidence on U.S. Patent Quality and Reforms to Reduce Patent Application Backlogs” (IPPI Jul. 2025)

Ani Harutyunyan & William Matcham, Measuring Patent Quality and Reducing the Backlog at the USPTO (IPPI Jul. 2025)

Bowman Heiden & Justus Baron, The Economic Impact of Patent Holdout, 38 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 3 (Symposium Summer 2024)

Zachary Henderson, Rethinking Robot Liability (July 01, 2025). 67 B.C. L. Rev __ (Forthcoming, 2026)

Camilla Alexandra Hrdy, Trade Secrets and Artificial Intelligence (July 14, 2025). Rutgers Law School Research Paper, Trade Secrets and Artificial Intelligence Forthcoming in Elgar Concise Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence and the Law (Edward Elgar, eds. Ryan Abbott, Elizabeth Rothman, forthcoming, 2026) [Also promoted on the Private Law Theory blog]

Gabriela Lenarczyk, The Transatlantic Clinical Trial Transparency Gap (July 29, 2025)

Alexander Raskovich, Homogeneous Product Bertrand Oligopoly (June 18, 2025)

Michael Risch, The Double Patenting Puzzle (July 08, 2025). Houston Law Review, Volume 63, forthcoming 2025

Dr. Nicola Searle and Dr. Bernhard Ganglmair, “Mapping trade secrets litigation to national security concerns and patenting behaviours suggests striking relationship,” IAM Trade Secrets (July 1, 2025)

Dr. Nicola Searle, Bernhard Ganglmair, and Maurizio Borghi, Trusted Research and Innovation: How Knowledge Leakage Affects the Research & Innovation Ecosystem, IRC Report No. 24 (June 19, 2025)

Dr. Lili Yang, Liability Regime in Chinese Trademark Law: Evidence from Export-Oriented OEM in the Chinese Marketplace (May 15, 2025)

Categories
Patent Law Patent Litigation

TPLFA: Protecting Predatory Infringers

Blog post by Michael Doane

The CEO of a small technology-based company with many groundbreaking patents in its field once asked me what the point was of obtaining patents when the company simply did not have the resources to enforce them. Although patents provide many benefits, the ability to enforce them against infringers is paramount. Patent infringement litigation is euphemistically referred to as “The Sport of Kings” due to the burden imposed by massive legal fees and the redirection of resources away from the core business to litigation support. The American Intellectual Property Law Association estimates that the median cost of patent litigation is approximately $5 million with a median cost of $600,000 for cases in which less than $1 million is at risk.[1] The cost of patent litigation is inflated by large well-funded infringers engaging in what they prefer to call efficient infringement but is more properly called predatory infringement. From their perspective, it is more efficient to infringe and engage in protracted litigation in district court and before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) than to compensate the innovator at a properly negotiated market rate. Because of the high cost of litigation, they infringe because “they can get away with it . . .”[2] facing at worst a long delayed and potentially lower court-imposed royalty rate, assuming the patent owner survives the expense of litigation. Litigation funding or, in other words, third party investment in the potential outcome of litigation, is a step toward levelling the playing field by providing access to small innovators to the expensive enforcement mechanisms that are supposed to be available to all patent owners and not just a select few.

As if predatory infringement were not enough, a patent owner with limited internal resources now faces the prospect of third-party litigation funding being made unavailable to them. Recently, Senator Tillis tacked a bill known as the Tackling Predatory Litigation Funding Act (TPLFA) onto the One Big Beautiful Bill. Although it was ultimately removed on procedural grounds, it is highly likely that the TPLFA will be introduced as a standalone bill in the near future. Interestingly, the TPLFA does not make litigation funding illegal; instead it seeks to make litigation funding unprofitable. To discourage litigation funding, “qualified litigation proceeds” are to be taxed at “the highest rate of tax imposed by section 1 for such taxable year, plus 3.8 percentage points.”[3] In other words a penalty in excess of 40% is imposed on the proceeds of any litigation funding agreement paid to any third party that is not an attorney representing the party.[4]

Although the term “predatory” is in its title, the TPLFA does not purport to define or identify that which is predatory, but rather simply imposes this penalty on the proceeds from any litigation funding regardless of the nature and purpose of the litigation. Is it predatory for a small innovator to obtain the necessary resources to enforce its patents against a large well-funded infringer? Why should legitimate patent litigation be deemed predatory simply because the patent owner must seek outside resources to enforce its rights?

The other justification for TPLFA is China. The spectacle of purported Chinese investors targeting U.S. business through litigation funding is used as a strawman by those seeking limits on litigation funding to jury-rig some type of national security argument. Alleged fears of foreign investors gaining access to confidential information are properly and effectively handled by protective orders which limit access to attorneys. Ironically, most if not all the predatory infringers raising such concerns manufacture the vast majority of their products in China and certainly almost none manufacture in the United States.

In addition to the TPLFA, efforts are being made to impose disclosure requirements on those relying on litigation funding. The Litigation Transparency Act of 2025 would require an innovator relying on litigation funding to “disclose in writing to the court and all other named parties to the civil action the identity of any person (other than counsel of record) that has a right to receive any payment or thing of value that is contingent on the outcome of the civil action. . .”[5] along with a copy of the agreement. These disclosure requirements are meant to discourage litigation funding by imposing additional burdens on the patent owner while acting as a distraction from the real issue in such cases—patent infringement.  As noted in the E-Discovery Model Order developed by the Federal Circuit Advisory Council the key and most consequential issues in patent litigation are:

  • what the patent states,
  • how the accused products work,
  • what the prior art discloses, and
  • the proper calculation of damages.[6]

The identity of those that may or may not be providing financial support for the litigation could not be more irrelevant to these issues.

The TPLFA and Litigation Transparency Act are being touted as litigation reform but are actually designed to limit the ability of small, less-resourced innovators to obtain the funding necessary to enforce their patent rights. Predatory infringers wish to maintain the expensive patent litigation system to enforce their own intellectual property rights, including against each other, without the annoyance of small innovators enforcing their intellectual property rights. Thus, they pursue their claimed reform around the edges by making intellectual property enforcement expensive and unprofitable. If the true goal is to eliminate predatory litigation funding, such activity should be specifically defined and identified so it can be properly addressed. Adopting the overbroad expedient of imposing an absurdly high tax on all litigation funding revenue to render it unprofitable further restricts access to the U.S. judicial system by small innovators. Requiring disclosure from the plaintiff, but not the defendant, imposes another burden and also provides the defendant with an expectation of exactly how long they will need to protract litigation … just long enough to use up the funding. The effect of these bills would be to keep patent litigation a Sport of Kings.


[1] 2023 Report of the Economic Survey, American Intellectual Property Law Association.

[2] Colleen V. Chien, Holding Up and Holding Out, 21 MICH. TELECOMM. & TECH. L. REV. 1, 20 (2014).

[3] Id. at Sec. 2: Litigation Financing, Pg. 2, 7-17.

[4][4] Id. at Sec. 2: Litigation Financing, Pg. 3, 9-17.

[5] H.R. 1109, 119th Cong. (2025) (Litigation Transparency Act of 2025).

[6]  Federal Circuit Advisory Council, An E-Discovery Model Order and Model Order Regarding E-Discovery In Patent Cases at 2 (2011).

The arguments and views in this blog post are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of IPPI or of any other organization.

Categories
IPPI News

IPPI Summer 2025 Progress Report (March-May 2025)


IPPI Spring 2025 Progress Report

(March – May 2025)
Navigation

IPPI Hosted and Co-Hosted Events

News & Speaking Engagements

Scholarship & Other Writing


Greetings from IPPI Research Professor & Executive Director Joshua Kresh

We are pleased to present our first comprehensive progress report since IPPI’s launch at The University of Akron on March 1st.

Team Transition and Growth: Our transition from George Mason University has been highly successful. The vast majority of our Scholars, Fellows, and Board Members have joined us in the move, and we have already brought on several new affiliates. Additionally, our Edison Fellows who had been accepted under C-IP2’s Fellowship accepted our invitation to continue their work with IPPI at Akron, ensuring continuity in our training program. Our inaugural Edison Fellowship meeting established strong foundations for the collaborative scholarship and policy work ahead.

Key Activities and Engagement: We convened a private roundtable bringing together academic researchers and industry representatives to address critical intellectual property policy questions and identify research priorities. We also completed our WIPO Summer School program (detailed in our next report) and maintained active engagement in policy discussions, including submitting formal comments on proposed pharmaceutical tariffs. Senior Fellow for China IP Mark A. Cohen provided testimony before the U.S. Senate, demonstrating our commitment to informing policy at the highest levels.

Looking Forward: Our publication pipeline includes several short-form policy pieces and longer academic articles from recent Edison Fellows scheduled for release over the coming months. As for events, we will host another private roundtable in August, with additional roundtables planned for fall 2025 and winter 2026. Our inaugural annual IP conference is scheduled for February 2026 in Orlando, Florida (more details to come soon).

We welcome engagement from stakeholders interested in participating in our events or contributing to our academic and policy initiatives. Please contact me at jkresh@uakron.edu to discuss collaboration opportunities.

Best regards,

Joshua Kresh
Research Professor & Executive Director
IPPI: The IP Policy Institute
The University of Akron School of Law
Washington, D.C.


IPPI Hosted & Co-Hosted Events

These are events either hosted or co-hosted by the members of the IPPI team and our affiliates from March through May 2025.

2025-2026 Thomas Edison Innovation Fellowship: First Meeting (Virtual)
On April 10-11, IPPI hosted the first meeting of the 2025-2026 Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship. Meeting One was for the purpose of the Edison Fellows presenting their research proposals. Edison Fellows submitted brief synopses detailing their proposed theses and research, and Distinguished Commentators and other Edison Fellows commented on the research proposals.

  • 2025-2026 Edison Fellows
    • Srinivasan Ananthraman, Senior IP Manager, Ashland Inc.
    • Matt (Mateusz) Blaszczyk, Research Fellow in Law and Mobility & Managing Editor, Journal of Law and Mobility, University of Michigan Law School
    • Zachary Henderson, Visiting Assistant Professor and Shashi and Dipanjan “DJ” Deb Faculty Scholar, UC Law San Francisco
    • Allison Schmitt, Fellow and Director, BCLT Life Sciences Law & Policy Center, UC Berkeley School of Law
    • Andrew Vassallo, Associate Professor, Shippensburg University
    • Bhamati Viswanathan, Scholar, IPPI; Assistant Professor, New England Law | Boston
  • 2025-2026 Distinguished Commentators
    • Professor John Duffy, Senior Scholar, IPPI; Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law, Class of 1966 Research Professor of Law, & Director, Center on Intellectual Property Law, University of Virginia School of Law
    • Professor Erika Lietzan, Senior Scholar, IPPI; Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, William H. Pittman Professor of Law, & Timothy J. Heinsz Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law
    • Professor Michael Risch, Senior Scholar, IPPI; Professor of Law, Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law
    • Professor Mark Schultz, Faculty Chair, Senior Fellow for Copyright and the Creative Industries, & Senior Scholar, IPPI; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Chair in Intellectual Property Law & Director, Intellectual Property and Technology Law Program, The University of Akron School of Law

Hybrid Roundtable/Policy Networking Session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration”
On May 21, this invitation-only, off-the-record gathering convened our community both online and at the offices of the Association of American Publishers (AAP) in Washington, D.C. to share views and information about important policy issues and to consider areas of near-term academic and policy research.


News & Speaking Engagements

These are news and speaking engagements for the members of the IPPI team and our affiliates from March through May 2025.

Amicus Briefs

  • In April, the Association of American Publishers (AAP), one of IPPI’s valued sustaining donors, filed a brief in Richard Kadrey, et al., v. Meta Platforms, Inc. “in support of the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment and opposition to defendant’s motion for partial summary judgement. Read the text of the brief.
  • An Amicus Brief of Copyright Law Professors (U.S. April 2025) in Richard Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division) was signed by IPPI Senior Scholars and Professors Jonathan M. Barnett, Jon M. Garon, and Christopher M. Newman and IPPI Scholars and Professors Zvi Rosen and Bhamati Viswanathan, among others. (Additional links: TechCrunch | Brief, Bloomberg Law Court Dockets)

Comments & Testimony

  • On May 7, IPPI submitted formal comments to the U.S. Department of Commerce regarding its Section 232 investigation of pharmaceutical imports, cautioning against imposing tariffs on medicines and their ingredients. In our submission, IPPI scholars Mark Schultz, Emily Michiko Morris, and Joshua Kresh explain that imposing such tariffs would have severe negative consequences for American patients, healthcare affordability, and U.S. pharmaceutical innovation leadership. (Read more on IPPI’s blog)
  • On May 14, IPPI Senior Fellow for China IP & Scholar Mark A. Cohen and IPPI Advisory Board Member Karyn A. Temple (Senior Executive Vice President and Global General Counsel, Motion Picture Association) testified before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property during the hearing on “Foreign Threats to American Innovation and Economic Leadership.” (Recording of the hearing | Mr. Cohen’s written testimony | Ms. Temple’s written testimony)

Welcome to New Affiliates

  • Professor Sean Pager, Professor of Law and Associate Director, Intellectual Property, Information & Communications Law Program (IPIC) at Michigan State University College of Law, joined IPPI as a Senior Scholar this May. Learn more about Sean Pager and his work | Says Professor Pager, “I am excited to join IPPI. My research on ‘digital democratization’ in creative content industries fits well with IPPI’s mission of exploring how intellectual property affects creative economies through evidence-based engagement.”
  • Jennifer Brant, CEO & Founder of Innovation Insights Sarl, joined IPPI as a Practitioner in Residence this May. Learn more about Jennifer Brant and her work | Says Ms. Brant, “I’m thrilled to formalize my partnership with IPPI. The Institute’s work linking academic research with cutting-edge industry insights to inform policymakers is exactly what we’ve championed at Innovation Insights for over a decade. I’m especially keen to continue our collaboration to expand access to patent systems, improve local manufacturing capacity, and advance policies that stimulate innovation in critical sectors like health and cellular technology, while supporting long-term growth.”

Biorasi Podcast Interview
IPPI’s Mark Schultz, Emily Michiko Morris, and Joshua Kresh were interviewed by host Chris O’Brien for the April 23 Episode 52 of Biorasi’s Few and Far Between Podcast on IP considerations for biopharmaceutical companies.

* * *

Dr. Srinivasan Ananthraman (2025-2026 IPPI Edison Fellow; Senior IP Manager, Ashland Inc.)

  • Participated as an Edison Fellow and presenter for the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship

Dr. Kristina M. L. Acri, née Lybecker (IPPI Senior Scholar; John L. Knight Chair of Economics and Professor of Economics, Colorado College)

  • In late March, “was delighted and honored to have participated in the important convening at the The Banbury Center on ‘Government Challenges to U.S. Patent Rights’ for thoughtful and stimulating discussion.”
  • In March, completed a Special Volume book chapter entitled “The Financing of the Market for Biopharmaceutical Innovation” for the volume The pharmaceutical market: how can international trade and health be reconciled? / Le marché pharmaceutique: quelles voies pour une dialectique commerce international et santé? Publication by Mare et Martin is expected in 2025.
  • With Professor Emily Michiko Morris, secured a grant from C4IP to work on a research project entitled “Empirical Analyses of Alleged Pharmaceutical Patent Thickets”
  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Jonathan Barnett (IPPI Senior Scholar; Torrey H. Webb Professor of Law, USC Gould School of Law)

  • Was interviewed for April 10 podcast episode of Understanding IP Matters, hosted by Bruce Berman of The Center for Intellectual Property Understanding (CIPU)
  • Signed Amicus Brief of Copyright Law Professors (U.S. April 2025) in Richard Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division)
  • On April 24, spoke on the panel “AI’s emerging role in innovation, creative expression and IP rights” at The 2025 IP Awareness Summit® (IPAS) on AI, Innovation and Ownership: Building a Bridge to the Future, co-hosted by Dolby and CIPU in San Francisco, California
  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Matt (Mateusz) Blaszczyk (2025-2026 IPPI Edison Fellow; Research Fellow in Law and Mobility & Managing Editor, Journal of Law and Mobility, University of Michigan Law School)

  • Participated as an Edison Fellow and presenter for the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship
  • Presented on the “Impossibility of Artificial Inventors” at the University of San Diego School of Law Patent Law Conference, PatCon 13, held April 10-12
  • Moderated a panel at the 11th Annual Junior Scholars Conference, held at the University of Michigan Law School from April 25-26
  • Presented at the May 28-29 Richmond Junior Faculty Forum, held at the University of Richmond School of Law

Jennifer Brant (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; CEO & Founder, Innovation Insights)

  • In May 2025, joined IPPI as a Practitioner in Residence
  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Terrica Carrington (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Senior Counsel & Director, Law, Policy & International, Motion Picture Association)

  • In March, was promoted to Vice President, Law Policy & International with the Motion Picture Association. Congratulations from the whole IPPI team!
  • On May 21, participated in person in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Eric Claeys (IPPI Senior Fellow for Scholarly Initiatives & Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School)

  • Organized and participated in the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship

Mark Cohen (IPPI Senior Fellow for China IP & Scholar)

  • On March 25, served as a panelist for the webinar “Key Global IPR Challenges Facing the New Administration,” hosted by USC Gould School of Law
  • On March 27, spoke virtually on the panel “Medicine and Pharmacy in the Service of Health in a Global Perspective” as part of the Medicine, Law & Society’s 34th International Conference on Medicine and Pharmacy in the Service of Health, which was hosted by the University of Maribor in Slovenia
  • Was quoted in April 1 IAM article “China reinforces regulatory toolkit with new rules on foreign IP disputes” (subscription required)
  • On April 21, spoke with Gary Rieschel (Board Chair, Asia Society Northern California & Seattle; Founding Managing Partner, Qiming) for the hybrid Asia Society Seattle roundtable “What the First Ninety Days Reveal About the Future of U.S.-China Relations”
  • On April 24, spoke on the panel “The shifting IP business landscape: the U.S., Europe and Asia” at The 2025 IP Awareness Summit® (IPAS) on AI, Innovation and Ownership: Building a Bridge to the Future, co-hosted by Dolby and The Center for Intellectual Property Understanding (CIPU) in San Francisco, California
  • On May 14, spoke on the Hudson Institute panel “Patents and China: What Is the Right Policy for the America First Agenda?”
  • On May 14, testified before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property for the hearing on “Foreign Threats to American Innovation and Economic Leadership” (Recording of the hearing | Written testimony)
  • On May 21, spoke on the LES webinar “Licensing Between the U.S. and China – Navigating the Shoals”
  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Michael Doane (IPPI Scholar; Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, The University of Akron School of Law; 2024-2025 IPPI Edison Fellow)

John F. Duffy (IPPI Senior Scholar; Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law, Class of 1966 Research Professor of Law, & Director, Center on Intellectual Property Law, University of Virginia School of Law)

  • Participated as a Distinguished Commentator in the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship

Gillian Fenton, Esq., CLP (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Founder and Managing Director, LST Strategies LLC)

  • In March, attended the AUTM annual meeting, at which Ms. Fenton instructed in the LES Certified Licensing Professionals exam preparation course (in person)
  • In March, co-taught a one-and-a-half-day custom LES course on biopharmaceutical licensing best practices for a multinational pharma company (in person)
  • In March, taught Module 1 (Intellectual Property Basics) of the LES IP Licensing Basics course (virtual)
  • In March, taught Domains 2 and 3 of the LES Certified Licensing Professionals exam preparation course (virtual)
  • In March, attended a CLP webinar on “Monetizing University Intellectual Property”
  • In March, attended a CSIS webinar presenting the Center’s Transition Report on IP to the Trump Administration
  • On April 1, attended the annual CSIS LeadershIP 2025 conference
  • Over the course of April and May, co-taught two different custom LES professional education courses to the business and corporate development teams of two multinational pharmaceutical companies, and co-taught the LES professional education course on Industry, Universities and Government Licensing 

Jon M. Garon (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law and Director of the Intellectual Property, Cybersecurity, and Technology Law program, Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law)

  • Signed Amicus Brief of Copyright Law Professors (U.S. April 2025) in Richard Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division)
  • Served as a panelist for “Navigating the Shift: How State Legislative Trends Affect Corporations and Business Lawyers,” moderated the panel “The New Administration’s Strategy on AI, Cyber, and FinTech Policy,” and spoke on the panel “Professional Responsibility Rules as a Cybersecurity Framework, Ethical Traps for Counsel and Clients in Data Security” at the ABA Business Law Section Spring Meeting, held in New Orleans, Louisiana, from April 24-26
  • Was interviewed with fellow lawyer and AI/cybersecurity expert Candace Jones for May 5 episode “Mind the Gap: Episode 19: The Intersection of Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence” of the ABA podcast To the Extent That…” (Listen on Apple Podcasts | Learn more about the episode on ABA’s website)

Michael Goodyear (IPPI Scholar; Acting Assistant Professor, New York University School of Law; Fellow, NYU Law’s Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy)

Zachary Henderson (2025-2026 IPPI Edison Fellow; Visiting Assistant Professor and Shashi and Dipanjan “DJ” Deb Faculty Scholar, UC Law San Francisco)

  • Participated as an Edison Fellow and presenter for the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship
  • Gave an April 17 video interview to ABC7 News and an April 23 radio interview to KCBS Radio reporter Cathy Whitman on AI and jobs
  • In March, presented work-in-progress article Laboratories of Mediocrity [WT] at the Junior Scholars’ Conference at Northeastern University

Steven D. Jamar (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Director, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice (IIPSJ); Professor Emeritus, Howard University School of Law)

  • With Professor Lateef Mtima, submitted a book chapter for an anthology being edited by Johanna Gibson, Research Handbook on IP and Social Justice (Johanna Gibson, ed. Oxford University Press 2026) (forthcoming, first quarter of 2026). Their co-authored chapter is entitled “Placing Intellectual Property Social Justice within the International Human Rights Context,” while Professor Jamar has also submitted a second chapter to the same anthology entitled “Challenges to Intellectual Property Regimes Presented by Generative Artificial Intelligence Programs.”

Joshua Kresh (Research Professor & Executive Director, IPPI, The University of Akron School of Law)

  • Moderated a panel on AI & IP at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Global Intellectual Property Institute’s Global IP Summit on April 9 in Washington, D.C.
  • Organized and participated in the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship
  • On April 16, moderated a panel on standard essential patents at The IP Leadership Executive 2025 in San Jose, California
  • With Mark Schultz and Emily Michiko Morris, was interviewed by host Chris O’Brien for the April 23 Episode 52 of Biorasi’s Few and Far Between Podcast on IP considerations for biopharmaceutical companies
  • On April 29, moderated a panel on pending legislation and life sciences litigation at the American Conference Institute (ACI) Paragraph IV Disputes conference in New York City
  • On May 7, with Mark Schultz and Emily Michiko Morris, submitted formal comments to the U.S. Department of Commerce regarding its Section 232 investigation of pharmaceutical imports, cautioning against imposing tariffs on medicines and their ingredients (Read more on IPPI’s blog)
  • On May 19, spoke on a panel on pending legislation and administrative action relating to life sciences patents at the ACI Advanced Summit on Life Sciences Patents
  • Organized and participated in person in IPPI’s May 21 hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Dr. John Liddicoat (IPPI Scholar; Senior Research Associate and Affiliated Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge)

  • Spoke at the International Drug Repurposing Conference 2025 (iDR25) Medicines Reimagined: Unlocking the Potential of Existing Drugs for Patient Benefit in Amsterdam, Netherlands. On May 7, Dr. Liddicoat spoke on “Global Government Repurposing Programmes” for the panel “Current Pathways and Initiatives for Drug Repurposing,” and on May 8 spoke on “IP and IP-Less Strategies for Getting New Uses to Patients” as a panelist for the session “Mixed Economies to Drive Drug Repurposing Success”
  • On May 14, presented paper The Republic of Translational Medicine at the Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Conference in Vienna, Austria
  • On May 25, spoke on “The Missing Link” for KiiPH Annual Research Day in London, UK

Erika Lietzan (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, William H. Pittman Professor of Law, & Timothy J. Heinsz Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law)

  • Participated as a Distinguished Commentator in the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship

Daryl Lim (IPPI Senior Scholar; H. Laddie Montague Jr. Chair in Law; Associate Dean for Research and Innovation; Founding Director, Intellectual Property Law and Innovation Initiative; and co-hire, Institute for Computational and Data Sciences, Penn State University)

  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Dr. William Matcham (IPPI Scholar; Assistant Professor (Lecturer) of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London)

  • On May 12, presented the paper Screening Property Rights for Innovation, a piece on patent examination co-written with Mark Schankerman, at the University College London Department of Economics Gorman Lecture and Conference 2025

Emily Michiko Morris (IPPI Associate Faculty Chair, Senior for Life Sciences, and Senior Scholar; 2021-2022 Edison Fellow; David L. Brennan Endowed Chair, Associate Professor, and Associate Director of the Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology, University of Akron School of Law)

  • With Professor Kristina Acri, secured a grant from C4IP to work on a research project entitled “Empirical Analyses of Alleged Pharmaceutical Patent Thickets”
  • Organized and participated in the March 24 27th Annual Symposium on Intellectual Property Law and Policy, hosted by The University of Akron’s Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology at Akron Law, Akron, Ohio, speaking on the panel “Intellectual Property Law and Policy in the New Administration”
  • With Mark Schultz and Joshua Kresh, was interviewed by host Chris O’Brien for the April 23 Episode 52 of Biorasi’s Few and Far Between Podcast on IP considerations for biopharmaceutical companies
  • On May 7, with Mark Schultz and Joshua Kresh, submitted formal comments to the U.S. Department of Commerce regarding its Section 232 investigation of pharmaceutical imports, cautioning against imposing tariffs on medicines and their ingredients (Read more on IPPI’s blog)
  • Organized and participated in person in IPPI’s May 21 hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Lateef Mtima (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law; Founder and Director, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice (IIPSJ))

  • With Professor Steve Jamar, submitted a book chapter for an anthology being edited by Johanna Gibson, Research Handbook on IP and Social Justice (Johanna Gibson, ed. Oxford University Press 2026) (forthcoming, first quarter of 2026). Their co-authored chapter is entitled “Placing Intellectual Property Social Justice within the International Human Rights Context.”

Loren Mulraine (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Director of Music and Entertainment Law Studies, Belmont University – College of Law)

Michael D. Murray (IPPI Scholar; Spears Gilbert Associate Professor of Law, University of Kentucky)

  • On March 26, delivered the Fifth Annual Judy Stinson Lecture at Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law on the topic “Generative AI at 2 ½ – Making it work for Law Practice (and Legal Education)” (View slide deck | View recording)
  • On April 11, addressed the University of Kentucky Rosenberg College of Law Visitors’ Committee on the topic of “Artificial Intelligence and the Law”
  • On April 23, participated on a panel with U.S. Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY), the Hon. Andrei Iancu and Peter Krug (Council for Innovation Promotion, C4IP), and Ian McClure (UK Vice President for Innovation at UK HealthCare and Associate Vice President for Research) on “Artificial Intelligence’s Impact on Kentucky and the Nation” as part of the “Blueprints for Innovation—Intellectual Property in the Bluegrass State” conference
  • On May 14, represented the University of Kentucky at the Universities Research Association’s virtual Research Policy Forum on Artificial Intelligence in Research and Education in a talk entitled “Teaching and Research in the Age of Generative AI – A Report on 2½ Years of Research” (View recording | View slide deck)
  • On May 28, presented a paper on Agentic AI, Reasoning Models, and Deep Research in Global Legal Practice at the Global Legal Skills Institute’s GLS-17 Conference at Masaryk University, Faculty of Law, in Brno, Czechia (View slide deck

Christopher M. Newman (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor of Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School)

  • Signed Amicus Brief of Copyright Law Professors (U.S. April 2025) in Richard Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division)

Kristen Jakobsen Osenga (IPPI Senior Fellow for Innovation Policy & Senior Scholar; Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar and Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law)

  • Was among the University of Richmond School of Law professors featured in Richmond Law Magazine’s Spring 2025 issue for “creat[ing[ newsworthy impact with their scholarship” (LinkedIn)
  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Sean A. Pager (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law; Associate Director, Intellectual Property, Information & Communications Law Program (IPIC), Michigan State University College of Law)

  • In May, joined IPPI as a Senior Scholar

Dr. Yogesh Pai (IPPI Scholar; Head – Patents and Treaties Law Section, The World Intellectual Property Organization – WIPO)

  • IPPI congratulates Dr. Pai on his new position as Head – Patents and Treaties Law Section with the World Intellectual Property Organization – WIPO! Previously, Dr. Pai was Assistant Professor at National Law University Delhi (NLUD) and the Co-Director of Centre for Innovation, Intellectual Property and Competition (CIIPC) at National Law University Delhi. He was also in-charge of the IPR Chair at NLU Delhi established by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India.

Douglas Park (IPPI Research Fellow; Research Fellow, Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology; Visiting Research Assistant Professor, The University of Akron School of Law)

Dr. Alexander Raskovich (IPPI Senior Economist)

  • Presented new paper entitled Homogeneous Product Bertrand Oligopoly to the Economic Analysis Group of the U.S. Department of Justice on May 14 and to the Hal White Antitrust Conference on June 2

Michael Risch (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law)

  • Participated as a Distinguished Commentator in the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship
  • Presented “Double Patenting and its Discontents” at Temple Law’s IP Colloquium in April 2025
  • Was quoted in May 22 MLex article “In US patent row between Google, EcoFactor, gatekeepers get a bigger yard”

Alexandra Jane Roberts (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law and Media & Faculty Director, Center for Law, Information and Creativity (CLIC), Northeastern University School of Law)

  • On February 20, served as a discussant for the event “CLIC for Social Justice: The Free Exercise of Copyright Behind Bars” at Northeastern University’s Center for Law, Information & Creativity (CLIC)
  • In March, research in article Trademark Failure to Function (104 Iowa L. Rev. 1977 (2019)) was cited by the Eastern District of New York (EDNY) in its decision in Medical Depot, Inc. v. Med Way US, Case No. 22-CV-01272
  • Was quoted in March 12Bloomberg article “Influencers’ Commission Hijacking Suits Have Rocky Legal Road” about content creators’ lawsuit against PayPal
  • On March 14, served as a discussant for a screening of the documentary “As We Speak: Rap Music on Trial” at Northeastern College of Arts Media & Design. Kemba, rapper and creator of the documentary, visited Northeastern for the event.
  • Was quoted in March 26 Front Office Sports article “Boston NWSL Team Tries Second Name: Legacy” about athletic team trademark selection
  • Was quoted in March 27 Front Office Sports article “Duke Is Furious About ‘The White Lotus’” about the use of Duke University’s trademarks in a television show
  • Spoke on the April 9 The Fashion Law webinar “Dupes: Understanding the Legal Implications and Challenges” and presented article Dupes
  • On April 1, hosted and moderated conversation “Use & Disclosure of AI in IP” at Northeastern University School of Law
  • In May, presented article Multi-Level Lies at “Multilevel Marketing: The Consumer Protection Challenge” in Washington, D.C.
  • Article Multi-Level Lies was featured in May 14 The Regulatory Review piece “Multi-Level Marketing, Multi-Level Accountability”
  • Was quoted in May 22 Front Office Sports article “Steve Madden Sues Adidas to Protect Its Own Use of Stripes” about a trademark dispute between Adidas and Steve Madden
  • Was quoted in May 28 The Fashion Law article about the sad beige influencer case and its resolution

W. Keith Robinson (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Wake Forest University School of Law)

  • Was invited to present on “Accountability, Responsibility, and Transparency in AI Patents” for the Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts Symposium, New Frontiers in Property in the Time of AI, at the University of Washington School of Law in Seattle, WA in March
  • Gave a radio interview on AI-assisted patent inventorship and legal implications for a March 17 episode of The Shaye Ganam Show (630 CHED/770 CHQR, March 17, 2025)

Zvi S. Rosen (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor, University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law)

  • Congratulations to Professor Rosen, who is joining University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law as an Associate Professor this June!
  • On March 1, spoke at the Liberty University Law Review’s Law Review Symposium “Artificial Intelligence, Authentic Conversations”
  • Appeared on Brian Frye’s Ipse Dixit podcast to discuss his work on AI and copyright law (March 27 episode “Zvi Rosen on the History of Copyright in Computer-Generated Works”)
  • On March 27, gave a trademark history seminar on “Champagne and Worcestershire: The Struggle to Establish International Trademark Law in the United States” as part of the CREATe Trade Mark Seminar Series
  • Signed Amicus Brief of Copyright Law Professors (U.S. April 2025) in Richard Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division)
  • On May 21, participated virtually in IPPI’s hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Dr. Allison Schmitt (2025-2025 IPPI Edison Fellow; Fellow and Director, BCLT Life Sciences Law & Policy Center, UC Berkeley Law)

  • Participated as an Edison Fellow and presenter for the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship

Mark F. Schultz (IPPI Faculty Chair, Senior Fellow for Copyright and the Creative Industries, & Senior Scholar; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Chair in Intellectual Property Law, University of Akron School of Law; Director, Center for Intellectual Property Law and Technology)

  • Organized and participated in the March 24 27th Annual Symposium on Intellectual Property Law and Policy, hosted by The University of Akron’s Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology at Akron Law, Akron, Ohio, speaking on the panel “Trade Secret Game-Changers: New Rules from Landmark Decisions”
  • With Emily Michiko Morris and Joshua Kresh, was interviewed by host Chris O’Brien for the April 23 Episode 52 of Biorasi’s Few and Far Between Podcast on IP considerations for biopharmaceutical companies
  • Participated as a Distinguished Commentator in the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship
  • On May 7, with Emily Michiko Morris and Joshua Kresh, submitted formal comments to the U.S. Department of Commerce regarding its Section 232 investigation of pharmaceutical imports, cautioning against imposing tariffs on medicines and their ingredients (Read more on IPPI’s blog)
  • Organized and participated in person in IPPI’s May 21 hybrid roundtable/policy networking session on “IP Policy in the Second Trump Administration,” hosted in Washington, D.C.

Brenda Simon (IPPI Senior Scholar; ProFlowers Professor of Internet Studies and Professor of Law, California Western School of Law)

  • On April 11, presented on “Bespoke Regulation of Artificial Intelligence” at PatCon 13, the annual patent law conference at the University of San Diego School of Law
  • On April 5, was named the recipient of the teaching award for “Favorite 1L Professor” at California Western School of Law. Congratulations to Professor Simon!
  • On May 16, presented on “Artificial Intelligence and the Self-Represented Inventor” at the Biolaw Conference at Stanford Law School

Dr. Andrew Vassallo (2025-2026 IPPI Edison Fellow; Associate Professor, Shippensburg University)

  • Participated as an Edison Fellow and presenter for the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship

Dr. Bhamati Viswanathan (IPPI Scholar; Assistant Professor of Law, New England Law | Boston)

  • On April 3, spoke on a panel about Copyright and AI at the Boston IP Lawyers Association (BIPLA)
  • Was quoted in April 8 Bloomberg News article “OpenAI Copyright Suit Consolidation Portends Consistency, Risk” on the recent consolidation of NYT v. OpenAI and other copyright-related AI lawsuits in the Second Circuit
  • On April 9, led a panel on “Copyright, IP, and Rights Stewardship for Artist-Endowed Foundations” at the Aspen Institute Artists-Endowed Foundations Initiative (AEFI)
  • Participated as an Edison Fellow and presenter for the virtual April 10-11 First Meeting of the 2025-2026 Edison Fellowship
  • In April, joined several illustrious IP professors in signing onto an amicus brief in the Kadrey v. Meta case, which involves AI training its LLMS on creative works: Amicus Brief of Copyright Law Professors (U.S. April 2025) in Richard Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division). (Additional links: TechCrunch | Brief, Bloomberg Law Court Dockets)

Scholarship & Other Writing

These are articles and other pieces written by members of the IPPI team or our affiliates from March through May 2025.

Kristina Acri, “Foreign IP Violators Could Halt Colorado’s New Gold Rush,” Westword (March 29, 2025)

Kristina Acri, “The Financing of the Market for Biopharmaceutical Innovation,” in The pharmaceutical market: how can international trade and health be reconciled? / Le marché pharmaceutique: quelles voies pour une dialectique commerce international et santé? (Mare et Martin 2025)

Jonathan Barnett, “Big Tech M&A Risk Under Trump May Resemble Biden Era,” Law360 (May 20, 2025)

Matt Blaszczyk, “Thaler v. Perlmutter: Human Authors at the Center of Copyright?,” Kluwer Copyright Blog (April 8, 2025)

Mark Cohen, “Implications of the Recent WTO Ruling on China’s SEP Practices,” China IPR (April 27, 2025)

Mark Cohen, “Navigating the New Chinese Regulations on Foreign IP Disputes,” China IPR (March 23, 2025)

Mark Cohen, “The Revised US-China Science and Technology Agreement – A Narrow Bridge to Drive Further Cooperation,” China IPR (April 21, 2025)

Michael Doane, Patent Law’s Trade Remedy (February 01, 2025). Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, Volume 28*
*The research and writing of this paper were supported by the Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship

Jon M. Garon, Artificial Intelligence Law and Regulation in a Nutshell (West Academic Publishing, 2025) (View and purchase at Amazon or West Academic)

Michael P. Goodyear, Infringing Information Architectures, 58 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1959 (2025)

Michael P. Goodyear, Artificial Infringement. In Proceedings of the 2025 Symposium on Computer Science and Law (CSLAW ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3709025.3712208

Zachary Henderson, AI and Probabilistic Dispute Resolution (July 31, 2024). Wisconsin Law Review, Vol. 2025, Issue 1 [Wisconsin Law Review | SSRN]*
*Zachary Henderson is a 2025-2026 IPPI Edison Fellow.

Camilla Hrdy, “OpenEvidence v. Pathway: The Legal Battle Over AI Reverse Engineering,” Written Description (March 4, 2025)

IPPI Staff, “IPPI Cautions that Pharmaceutical Tariffs Would Harm Patients and U.S. Innovation Leadership,” IPPI Blog (May 9, 2025)

Lateef Mtima and Steven Jamar, “Placing Intellectual Property Social Justice within the International Human Rights Context,” in Research Handbook on IP and Social Justice (Johanna Gibson, ed. Oxford University Press 2026) (forthcoming, first quarter of 2026)

Michael D. Murray, Agentic AI, Reasoning Models, and Deep Research in Global Legal Practice (May 29, 2025)

Sean Pager & Eric Priest, The Cost of Music: Has Digitization Made Copyright Obsolete?, 14 NYU J. Intel. Prop & Ent. L. __ (2026)

Alexander Raskovich, Homogenous Product Bertrant Oligopoly (2025)

Alexandra J. Roberts, Dupes, 14 NYU J. of Intell. Prop. & Ent. law 94 (2025)

Alexandra J. Roberts, Multi-level Lies, 58 UC Davis L. Rev. 2287 (2025)

W. Keith Robinson, “When Humans Use AI to Earn Patents, Who Is Doing the Inventing?,” The Conversation (March 14, 2025)

Zvi S. Rosen, “Some Initial Thoughts on the DC Circuit’s Rejection of AI Authorship,” (Mostly) IP History Blog (March 19, 2025) [on Thaler v. Perlmutter]

Mark F. Schultz, Emily Michiko Morris, & Joshua Kresh, Comments Re: Request for Public Comments on Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Pharmaceuticals and Pharmaceutical Ingredients (Doc. ID BIS-2025-0022) XRIN 0694-XC120 (May 7, 2025)

Categories
Biotech Healthcare Innovation International Law IPPI News Patent Law Patents Pharma

IPPI Cautions that Pharmaceutical Tariffs Would Harm Patients and U.S. Innovation Leadership

IPPI has submitted formal comments to the U.S. Department of Commerce regarding its Section 232 investigation of pharmaceutical imports, cautioning against imposing tariffs on medicines and their ingredients.

In our submission, IPPI scholars Mark Schultz, Emily Michiko Morris, and Joshua Kresh explain that imposing such tariffs would have severe negative consequences for American patients, healthcare affordability, and U.S. pharmaceutical innovation leadership.

Drawing on extensive research, particularly Geneva Network’s 2021 study modeling the effects of a 25% pharmaceutical tariff, our comments highlight five critical concerns:

  1. Higher Drug Prices for Patients: Research demonstrates that pharmaceutical tariffs create a “compounding effect” as each link in the supply chain adds markup to the tariff-inflated price, potentially increasing final costs by up to 80% for consumers.
  2. Drug Shortages Risk: With over 90% of U.S. prescriptions being for generic drugs and 83% of top generics having no domestic source, tariffs would disrupt existing supply chains and potentially force manufacturers to exit certain market segments.
  3. Ineffective for Boosting Domestic Manufacturing: Building pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities in the U.S. requires billions of dollars and 5-10 years to accomplish—making tariffs ineffective for addressing immediate or even medium-term supply concerns.
  4. International Retaliation Threats: Our comments note that major trading partners including China, Brazil, and the EU are already considering pharmaceutical IP rights suspensions and other countermeasures in response to U.S. tariff actions.
  5. Government Cost Implications: Paradoxically, the U.S. government could end up paying 2-6 times more through Medicare and Medicaid for tariff-inflated drugs than it collects in tariff revenue.

“Imposing tariffs on medicines would be counterproductive to U.S. interests,” said Mark Schultz, Faculty Chair of IPPI. “Such measures would ultimately undermine, rather than enhance, American healthcare security while threatening our position as the world leader in pharmaceutical innovation.”

The full text of IPPI’s comments is available here.

Categories
Patent Law

RESTORE, PERA and PREVAIL: Bills that fix problems with the patent system

Blog Post by Kristen Jakobsen Osenga

As the 118th Congress drew to a close at the end of 2024, there was a spate of intellectual property activity on Capitol Hill. I was fortunate enough to be part of one of these exciting events. On December 18, 2024, the IP Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the RESTORE Patent Rights Act. I was one of four witnesses testifying at that hearing, alongside fellow professor Jorge Contreras. The other two witnesses were Jacob Babcock, CEO of NuCurrent, and Joshua Landau, Senior Counsel, Innovation Policy, at the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA). Video of the hearing is available here. My written testimony is also published.

In addition to the hearing on the RESTORE Patent Rights Act, the Senate Judiciary Committee also voted to advance the PREVAIL Act to the full Senate in November 2024. The PREVAIL Act addresses a number of abuses plaguing PTAB proceedings. In addition to RESTORE and PREVAIL, other IP-related bills were introduced last Congress, including the PERA Act to clarify patent-eligible subject matter. All of these activities gave hope that Congress was ready to fix issues that interfered with innovators being able to obtain and enforce effective and reliable patent rights. As 2025 began and the new Congress was sworn in, patent advocates wished for them to pick up where the 118th Congress left off.

Thankfully, we did not have to wait long. On February 25, 2025, Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean re-introduced the RESTORE Patent Rights Act, which provides a presumption of injunctive relief when a patent is found to be valid and infringed. This bill fixes a string of events that began with the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in eBay v. MercExchange that has led to not just fewer injunctions being granted, but also fewer companies even seeking injunctive relief. (See article by Dr. Kristina M.L. Acri née Lybecker.) Because a patent only provides the right to exclude, if a patent owner cannot obtain an injunction, the patent loses much of its value. The presumptive injunction of the RESTORE Act would, as the name suggests, restore a patent’s exclusive right, as well as its value.

Further reading:

Categories
C-IP2 News IPPI News

Announcing IPPI + IPPI Spring 2025 Progress Report (December 2024-February 2025)


Navigation

Announcing IPPI: The IP Policy Institute

IPPI Spring Progress Report


Announcing IPPI: The IP Policy Institute

A Message from Faculty Chair Mark Schultz and Executive Director Joshua Kresh

Dear Friends of the Innovation and Creative Industries,

We’re excited to announce the launch of IPPI: The IP Policy Institute at The University of Akron School of Law. While our name is new, our team, mission, and commitment to great IP scholarship and policy work are very familiar.

Who We Are: IPPI emerges from the former C-IP2 team at George Mason University, bringing together familiar faces and new additions:

  • Professor Mark Schultz, original co-founder of C-IP2/CPIP, returns as Faculty Chair
  • Joshua Kresh continues as Research Professor and Executive Director
  • Professor Emily Michiko Morris joins as Associate Faculty Chair
  • Our dedicated and talented professional staff remains intact, ensuring operational continuity
  • We welcome Douglas Park as our new in-house Research Fellow

Continuing Our Mission: At IPPI, we remain committed to fostering rigorous, fact-based scholarship that examines IP’s vital role in promoting innovation and creativity. Our extensive network of scholars and supporters continues to be the foundation of our work.

Looking Forward: We’re hitting the ground running with a robust slate of programs:

  • The Edison Fellowship program continues uninterrupted
  • Academic roundtables and policy-focused events (details coming soon)
  • A special Winter Institute conference in Orlando next February
  • Expanded research initiatives and policy engagement in Washington DC
  • A newly launched global scholars’ network and international policy initiatives

Work Already Underway: We’ve enclosed our Spring Progress Report, highlighting the impressive work completed by our network. While this would have been the final C-IP2 report, it represents the ongoing scholarship and engagement that will continue under IPPI.

Join Us on This Journey: As we embrace this new chapter, we’re not just continuing established programs—we’re open to new ideas and collaborations. We welcome conversations with anyone interested in partnering with IPPI.

We value your continued engagement as we build on our strong foundation. Please reach out with any questions or ideas.

Best regards,

Headshot of Joshua KreshJoshua Kresh
Research Professor & Executive Director
Jkresh@uakron.edu

_

Headshot of Mark SchultzMark F. Schultz
Faculty Chair
Mschultz@uakron.edu

_

IPPI: The IP Policy Institute
The University of Akron School of Law
Washington, D.C.


IPPI Spring 2025 Progress Report

(December 2024 – February 2025)


IPPI Hosted & Co-Hosted Events*

*These are events either hosted or co-hosted by the members of the IPPI team and our affiliates from December 2024 through February 2025.

Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship**

On January 15-17, members of the IPPI team hosted the third and final meeting of the 2024-2025 Fellowship. The Edison Fellows presented substantially revised drafts of their research papers and received feedback from Distinguished Commentators and other Fellows before submission to journals.

**The Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship is a program now being organized by the IPPI team at The University of Akron.

Roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy

On February 12, members of the IPPI team hosted a roundtable on IP and high-tech policy in Arlington, VA. Academics, legal and industry professionals, and policymakers discuss topics such as “IP & the ITC,” “Access to Infringement Litigation,” “Remedies & Patent Infringement,” and “Antitrust & IP in the New Administration.”


News & Speaking Engagements*

*These are news and speaking engagements for the members of the IPPI team and our affiliates from December 2024 through February 2025.

Welcome to the IPPI team’s new Affiliates!

  • IPPI Economist
    • Dr. Alexander Raskovich (IPPI Senior Economist)
  • IPPI Scholars
    • Michael Goodyear (IPPI Scholar; Acting Assistant Professor, New York University School of Law; Fellow, NYU Law’s Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy; 2023-2024 Edison Fellow)
      • “After a wonderful experience researching the evolution of copyright doctrine in response to new technologies as an Edison Fellow last year, I am excited to continue working with [IPPI] as a Scholar!”
    • Professor Michael D. Murray (Spears Gilbert Associate Professor of Law University of Kentucky)
      • Says Professor Murray, “I am very happy to be named a “Scholar” of the [IPPI]. I have enjoyed participating in their conferences and roundtable discussions. [IPPI] always does an excellent job bringing industry experts into contact with academics to enrich the discussion and broaden the perspectives expressed on the critical IP topics of the day.”
    • Dr. Nicola Searle (IPPI Scholar; Reader (Associate Professor), Institute for Cultural and Creative Entrepreneurship (ICCE), Goldsmiths, University of London; 2023-2024 Edison Fellow)

2021-2022 Edison Fellow Molly Torsen Stech’s article Copyright Thickness, Thinness, and a Mannion Test for Images Produced by Generative Artificial Intelligence Applications was selected for INTA’s special AI Issue (November-December, 2024).

On December 12, IPPI Advisory Board Members the Hon. Paul R. Michel and the Hon. Susan G. Braden (Ret.) (also IPPI Jurist in Residence) joined other judges in signing and submitting an amicus brief in support of the appellant, urging reversal, in The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, et al.

On December 12, IPPI Advisory Board Member the Hon. Andrei Iancu spoke at the hybrid Hudson Institute event “What’s Ahead for Innovators and Creators in the New Trump Administration?”( event recording is available via link).

Congressional Testimony

  • On December 18, Mark Cohen (IPPI Senior Fellow for China IP) testified before the House Judiciary Committee in its last session on “IP and Strategic Competition with China”; this last hearing was on “Patents, Standards and Lawfare.” Mr. Cohen was the only person to testify twice before this committee during the two years in which it was holding hearings on IP and Strategic Competition with China. A video of the hearing is available on the hearing webpage, and Mr. Cohen’s written testimony is also available online.
  • Also on December 18, Professor Kristen Osenga (IPPI Senior Fellow for Innovation Policy) testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property’s Hearing “Time Change: The RESTORE Patent Rights Act: Restoring America’s Status as the Global IP Leader.” A video of the hearing is available on hearing webpage, along with Professor Osenga’s written testimony.

On January 22, The Well News published the commentary post “A Reality Check for Patent Quality Critics” by the Hon. Andrei Iancu and the Hon. David Kappos, Co-Chairs of the Council for Innovation Promotion (C4IP) and Members of IPPI’s Advisory Board. The piece cites the Sunwater Institute’s September 2024 policy report Patent Quality in the United States: Findings and Suggestions for Policymakers, co-authors of which include 2022-2023 Edison Fellows Dr. Ani Harutyunyan and Dr. William Matcham.

Media Mentions: October 2023 and 2024 IP conferences in Arlington, VA—run by members of the current IPPI team—were mentioned in several recent articles:

  • December 11 Fox News article on Judge Pauline Newman mentions the Judge’s delivering remarks for the October 2023 conference.
  • The conference was mentioned in Forbes December 6 article “Litigation Financing: A National Security Threat Or Lifeline For Startups?” by Dr. Christine McDaniel of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University

* * *

Dr. Kristina M. L. Acri, née Lybecker (IPPI Senior Scholar; John L. Knight Chair of Economics and Professor of Economics, Colorado College)

  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Jonathan Barnett (IPPI Senior Scholar; Torrey H. Webb Professor of Law, USC Gould School of Law)

  • In December, was mentioned as a speaker on “The Inevitable Consequences of Misguided Innovation Policy” as part of IPWatchdog LIVE 2025 event in March
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA
  • Discussed his book The Big Steal: Ideology, Interest, and the Undoing of Intellectual Property (Amazon | SSRN) for the virtual February 13 Hudson Institute event “The Big Steal: Big Tech’s Theft of Intellectual Property” (a recording of the event is available on the Hudson Institute’s webpage for the event)

Chief Judge Susan G. Braden (Ret.) (Court of Federal Claims (Ret.); IPPI Jurist in Residence)

  • Was mentioned in PatentDocs’ January 7 blog post “Enough is (Apparently) Enough – Part IV”

Daniel R. Cahoy (IPPI Senior Scholar; Robert G. and Caroline Schwartz Professor & Chair of the Risk Management Department, The Pennsylvania State University’s Smeal College of Business)

  • Recent article, Trademark’s Grip over Sustainability (94 Colo. L. Rev. 1041 (2023)), was selected for inclusion in the list of top 20 articles selected for the 2025 Environmental Law and Policy Annual Review (ELPAR), a joint publication of the Environmental Law Institute’s Environmental Law Reporter and Vanderbilt University Law School

Terrica Carrington (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Senior Counsel & Director, Law, Policy & International, Motion Picture Association)

  • In December, moderated a fireside chat between Karyn Temple (SEVP and Global General Counsel, MPA) and Deborah Lashley-Johnson (Acting Director, IP Attache Program, USPTO) at a summit co-hosted by the USPTO and the MPA’s Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment

Theo Cheng (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Arbitrator and Mediator, ADR Office of Theo Cheng LLC; Adjunct Professor, New York Law School)

Eric Claeys (IPPI Senior Fellow for Scholarly Initiatives & Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School)

  • On January 15-17, co-led in the virtual third and final meeting of the 2024-2025 Edison Fellowship

Mark Cohen (IPPI Senior Fellow for China IP & Scholar)

  • In early November, former USPTO Director the Honorable David Kappos, retired CAFC Chief Judge the Honorable Randall R. Rader, and Mr. Cohen filed an amicus brief in the TCL v Access Advance remand case before the Shenzhen Intermediate Court in China. The brief argues that the Supreme People’s Court of China misconstrued how patent pools work in licensing standardized technology in its assumption that pools necessarily owned the underlying patents and were therefor subject to the jurisdiction of the Chinese courts for violations of FRAND obligations (read more). An article in Law 360 by the three authors of the amicus brief in TCL v. Access Advance in China is forthcoming.
  • Was interviewed for December 12 Intellectual Assets Magazine (IAM) piece “US-China IP Relations Under the Microscope Ahead of Trump 2.0,” as well as being interviewed with others for second, December 18 piece “Potential US-China hostility under Trump ramps up risk for trade secret owners” (links may require subscription for access)
  • On December 13 (Japan time), spoke before Keio University, Japan, as part of a symposium on “Future of US-Asia/World Economic Relationships after 2024 Elections”
  • On December 18, testified before the House Judiciary Committee in its last session on “IP and Strategic Competition with China”; this last hearing was on “Patents, Standards and Lawfare.” Mr. Cohen was the only person to testify twice before this committee during the two years in which it was holding hearings on IP and Strategic Competition with China. A video of the hearing is available on the hearing webpage, and Mr. Cohen’s written testimony is also available online.
  • On January 7, discussed the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement (STA) in a virtual panel hosted by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
  • On February 2, moderated a virtual roundtable on China’s trademark law that was hosted by the UC Berkeley Center for Law & Technology (learn more)
  • On February 4, moderated the workshop “Has the Sleeping Dragon Woken Up? A Workshop on U.S.-China Tech Competition and Collaboration” on best practices for assessing China’s technological and scientific accomplishments. The workshop was hosted in San Francisco, CA by the Asia Society Northern California.
  • In February, Mr. Cohen’s comments on law firm exodus from China appeared in an article at ChinaFile
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Loletta (Lolita) Darden (IPPI Scholar; Visiting Associate Clinical Professor and Director, Intellectual Property and Technology Clinic, The George Washington University Law School)

  • Along with Samantha Levin, Esq., spoke at the Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts (WALA) session “Contracts and Copyright 101 for the Film Industry: Understanding Your Rights and Creative Ownership” as part of the DC Independent Film Forum’s series of professional seminars from February 12-17, 2025

Gregory Dolin (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law)

  • Was referenced in January 29 Patently-O patent blog post “Is Google Simply Asking for More Efficient Infringement?”

John F. Duffy (IPPI Senior Scholar; Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law and Paul G. Mahoney Research Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law)

  • On January 15-17, served as a Distinguished Commentator for the virtual third and final meeting of the 2024-2025 Edison Fellowship
  • Was mentioned in February 5 UVA Law news story “New Center on Intellectual Property Prepares Students for Future of Legal Practice”
  • Was mentioned in February 16 Yale Journal on Regulation Notice & Comment post “Federalist Society’s National Student Symposium, 3/7-3/8: Congress: Reviving the Impetuous Vortex”

Tabrez Ebrahim (IPPI Scholar; Associate Professor of Law at Lewis & Clark Law School)

  • On December 15, presented “Intellectual Property Considerations for Saudi Aramco” to the Legal Department and Chief IP Counsel of Saudi Aramco at the Saudi Aramco Corporate Headquarters in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
  • On December 26, presented “Introduction to Patent Law” at Jordan University of Science and Technology in Irbid, Jordan to the Faculty of Pharmacy

Gillian Fenton, Esq., CLP (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Founder and Managing Director, LST Strategies LLC)

  • In December, attended a Transition Report Roundtable hosted by CSIS
  • In December, instructed students in Module 1 (IP Basics) and Module 2 (Licensing Basics) of the LES entry-level IP Licensing Basics course

Jon M. Garon (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law and Director of the Intellectual Property, Cybersecurity, and Technology Law program, Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law)

  • In January, was appointed Associate Dean for Administration and Non-JD Programs at Nova Southeastern University | Shepard Broad College of Law, where he serves as Professor of Law and Director of the Goodwin Program for Society, Technology and the Law
  • In January, completed his term as chairperson of the AALS Section of Technology, Law, and Legal Education
  • In January, gave a presentation on “Adjusting Risk Management for AI” at the ABA Business Law Section Cyber and Technology Law Institute
  • In January, gave a presentation on “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Content on Fan Fiction”
  • In January, served as a moderator for the AALS Section of Technology, Law, and Legal Education Works In Progress at the 2025 AALS Annual Meeting
  • Was mentioned in February 25 ABA The Business Lawyer Winter 2024-2025, Volume 80, Issue 1 article “Survey of the Law of Cyberspace: An Introduction to the 2024-2025 Survey”

Michael Goodyear (IPPI Scholar; Acting Assistant Professor, New York University School of Law; Fellow, NYU Law’s Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy)

Dr. Ani Harutyunyan (IPPI Practitioner in Residence)

  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Justin (Gus) Hurwitz (IPPI Senior Scholar; Senior Fellow and Academic Director, Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School)

  • Was quoted in USA Today’s December 20 story “Will the Supreme Court save TikTok? What’s ahead in the final legal showdown.”
  • Was quoted in Bangkok Post’s January 10 article “TikTok showdown reaches US Supreme Court”
  • Was referenced in January 21 VERIFY report “VERIFYING what a TikTok ban means for you” with contributions from the Associated Press

Steven D. Jamar (IPPI Senior Scholar; Associate Director, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice (IIPSJ); Professor Emeritus, Howard University School of Law)

Joe Keeley (IPPI Practitioner in Residence; Principal, Keeley Law & Policy; Former Chief Counsel of Senate Budget and General Counsel of Senate Judiciary)

Joshua Kresh (Research Professor & Executive Director, IPPI, The University of Akron School of Law)

  • Joined The University of Akron School of Law as a Research Professor and Executive Director of IPPI: IP Policy Institute
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Erika Lietzan (IPPI Senior Scholar; William H. Pittman Professor of Law & Timothy J. Heinsz Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law)

  • On January 15-17, served as a Distinguished Commentator for the virtual third and final meeting of the 2024-2025 Edison Fellowship

Daryl Lim (IPPI Senior Scholar; H. Laddie Montague Jr. Chair in Law; Associate Dean for Research and Innovation; Founding Director, Intellectual Property Law and Innovation Initiative; and co-hire, Institute for Computational and Data Sciences, Penn State University)

  • Was mentioned in PSU’s December announcement “BBC Interviews Associate Dean Daryl Lim on Tech and Trump 2.0”
  • Article Trademark Confusion Revealed: An Empirical Analysis was selected for INTA’s special AI issue
  • Was mentioned in PSU Dickinson Law’s December story “Trademark Reporter Selects Associate Dean Daryl Lim’s Article for Special AI Issue”
  • Was quoted in PSU Law’s January announcement “Associate Dean Daryl Lim Featured in Reuters Commentary on Apple Siri Privacy Settlement”
  • On January 29, engaged in a Q&A with Penn State’s Institute for Computational and Data Sciences, “Q&A: Can AI be governed by an ‘equity by design’ framework?”
  • Was mentioned in The Debrief’s February 11 post “AI Governance Through ‘Equity by Design’ Is Needed to Protect Marginalized Communities, Expert Warns”
  • On February 21, spoke on the panel “The Clash of AI Competition and Copyright Law” at the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School Law & Economics Center’s 28th Annual Antitrust Symposium 

Irina D. Manta (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Hofstra University School of Law)

  • Was mentioned in February 14 Hofstra Law News story “Prof. Irina Manta Discusses Lawsuit Against AI Company for Alleged Copyright Infringement” (full story on Newsday)

Emily Michiko Morris (IPPI Associate Faculty Chair, Senior for Life Sciences, and Senior Scholar; 2021-2022 Edison Fellow; David L. Brennan Endowed Chair, Associate Professor, and Associate Director of the Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology, University of Akron School of Law)

  • Was named Faculty Co-Chair of The IP Policy Institute (IPPI) with The University of Akron School of Law
  • Was quoted in December 4 FDA Law Blog post “’If You’ve Got Legitimate Suspenders, Don’t Have an Unconstitutional Belt:’ Federalist Society Panel’s Take on Jarkesy and the Preserve Access to Affordable Generics and Biosimilars Act”

Lateef Mtima (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law; Founder and Director, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice (IIPSJ))

Loren Mulraine (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Director of Music and Entertainment Law Studies, Belmont University – College of Law)

Michael D. Murray (IPPI Scholar; Spears Gilbert Associate Professor of Law, University of Kentucky)

  • Joined IPPI as a Scholar
  • On January 8, presented “Teaching in the Age of Generative AI: Beyond the Basics,” a report on two years of research on generative AI in law and legal education, at the AALS Annual Meeting 2025 in San Francisco, CA
  • At the Center for Computational Sciences, University of Kentucky’s CCS/ITSRCI Seminar Series on AI in Practice, presented “The Intersection of Machine Learning, Generative AI, and Intellectual Property Law” on January 16 and moderated panel presentation “Learning new subjects with Gen AI: AI tutoring and the search for grounded truth” on January 23

Kristen Jakobsen Osenga (IPPI Senior Fellow for Innovation Policy & Senior Scholar; Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar and Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law)

  • On December 18, testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property’s Hearing “Time Change: The RESTORE Patent Rights Act: Restoring America’s Status as the Global IP Leader.” A video of the hearing is available on hearing webpage, along with Professor Osenga’s written testimony.
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Dr. Yogesh Pai (IPPI Scholar; Assistant Professor, National Law University Delhi (NLUD); Co-Director, Centre for Innovation, Intellectual Property and Competition at NLUD)

  • Was mentioned in a January 25 LiveLaw News Network announcement “NLU Delhi: Certificate Course On International Intellectual Property Law By Dr. Yogesh Pai”

Dr. Alexander Raskovich (IPPI Senior Economist; Director of Research, 2021-2024, Global Antitrust Institute (GAI), George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School)

  • Joined IPPI as Senior Economist
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Michael Risch (IPPI Senior Scholar; Vice Dean and Professor of Law, Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law)

  • Was cited in January 24 Business Insider article “They spoke out against their employer. Then they were hit with trade secret suits” (subscription may be required)
  • Was Referenced in January 29 Patently-O patent blog post “Is Google Simply Asking for More Efficient Infringement?”
  • Was interviewed for February 7 KCBS Radio segment “EU presses Apple for use of encrypted data in criminal investigations”

Alexandra Jane Roberts (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law and Media & Faculty Director, Center for Law, Information and Creativity (CLIC), Northeastern University School of Law)

  • Was quoted in December 18 Bloomberg article about the “Success Kid” meme litigation against Rep. Steve King
  • Was quoted in December 20 Decrypt article about a lawsuit over a meme coin
  • Spoke on the virtual December 6 panel “Copyright and Trademark Litigation Update” for OCEAN (Open Copyright Education Advisory Network)
  • In January, was interviewed about her research on trademark registration issues for minors on “Break the Business” and about an influencer lawsuit on Vox’s “Today, Explained” podcast and The Last Show with David Cooper
  • In January, was quoted in Women’s Wear Daily about the Sean “Diddy” Combs trial
  • Was interviewed about research on dupes for January 21 episode of Felicia Caponigri’s podcast, A Fashion Law Dinner Party with Felicia (listen RSS, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts)
  • Research on dupes was discussed in January 27 The Fashion Law article “Can ‘Authentic Fakes’ Exist? A Dive into Dupes” (article may require subscription)
  • In February, presented article Dupes at UNC Law and Harvard Law
  • Was quoted in February 20 Northeastern Global News article “Could James Bond lose the 007 name because of a trademark claim? A legal expert says it it’s not that simple” about attempts to cancel James Bond trademarks
  • Was quoted in February 26 Northeastern Global News article “Why did Birkenstock try to claim its sandals are art?” about IP protection for fashion and the recent Birkenstocks case
  • Was quoted in Sportico and CBS about trademark registrations for THREEPEAT and appeared on CBS Nightly News
  • In February, served as a panelist in “Pop Culture & the Law,”American University Law Review Spring Symposium
  • In February, served as a discussant for the book eventMood Machine: The Rise of Spotify and the Costs of the Perfect Playlist by Liz Pelly, Northeastern CLIC

Mark F. Schultz (IPPI Faculty Chair ; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Endowed Chair in Intellectual Property Law, University of Akron School of Law)

  • Was named Faculty Chair of The IP Policy Institute (IPPI) with The University of Akron School of Law
  • On December 10, spoke on the virtual U Akron – ITIF panel “Innovate4Health: How IP and Innovation Are Solving Global Health Challenges”
  • On January 15-17, served as a Distinguished Commentator for the virtual third and final meeting of the 2024-2025 Edison Fellowship
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA
  • Judged the LatAM Health Champions Startup Competition for INNOS Colombia. The winners of this life sciences startup competition will be hosted in the U.S. in May.

Dr. Nicola Searle (IPPI Scholar; Reader (Associate Professor), Institute for Cultural and Creative Entrepreneurship (ICCE), Goldsmiths, University of London)

  • Joined IPPI as a Scholar
  • IPPI congratulates Dr. Searle on her promotion to Reader (a higher rank of Associate Professor)! Dr. Searle is a 2023-2024 Edison Fellow, as run by members of the IPPI team and Affiliates, and she kindly says that her promotion is “thanks – in no small part – to your support and the Edison Fellowship.”

Ted Sichelman (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law; Director, Center for Intellectual Property Law & Markets; Founder & Director, Center for Computation, Mathematics, and the Law; Founder & Director, Technology Entrepreneurship and Intellectual Property Clinic)

  • On January 15-17, served as a Distinguished Commentator for the virtual third and final meeting of the 2024-2025 Edison Fellowship

Saurabh Vishnubhakat (IPPI Senior Scholar; Professor of Law, Yeshiva University Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law)

  • During the 2024-2025 academic year, Professor Vishnubhakat is on sabbatical at the NYU Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy, while continuing as Director of the IP+Information Law Program at Cardozo Law
  • Moderated the Federalist Society’s January 10 panel “Regulation of Algorithms” (video of panel)
  • Was quoted in an ABC News January 15 business story “How TikTok can still avoid a ban, according to experts”
  • Was referenced in January 29 Forbes Innovation, Consumer Tech article “When Will TikTok Be Back In The Apple App Store And Google Play Store?”
  • Participated in February 12 roundtable on Intellectual Property and High-Tech Policy hosted by members of the IPPI team in Arlington, VA

Scholarship & Other Writing

Jonathan M. Barnett, “Three Policy Resets to Promote U.S. Innovation Leadership,” Hudson Institute (January 8, 2025)

Jonathan Barnett, “Why Weak Intellectual Property Rights Threaten Innovation and Competition,” The Federalist Society (January 29, 2025)

Jonathan Barnett, “3 policy lessons from the DeepSeek panic,” The Hill (February 12, 2025)

Amicus Brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, et al. “Brief of Hon. Janice Rogers Brown, Hon. Paul R. Michel, Hon. Randall R. Rader, Hon. Thomas I. Vanaskie, Hon. Paul G. Cassell, and Hon. Susan G. Braden as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellant, Urging Reversal” (December 12, 2024)

Daniel R. Cahoy, The Techno-Optimist Case for Addressing Sustainability and its Grounding in Capitalist (Market) Incentives, in Inara Scott (ed.), Sustainable Capitalism: A Contradiction in Terms of Essential Work for the Anthropocene. Salt Lake City, UT, University of Utah Press (2024). (SSRN draft available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4317805)

Daniel R. Cahoy, Jorge Contreras, and Lynda Oswald, Overview of Worldwide Utility Model Filings, Litigation and Activity, in Jorge L. Contreras (ed.), Sub-Patent Innovation Rights: Utility Models, Petty Patents and Innovation Patents Around the World. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press (avail. Feb. 2025).

Daniel R. Cahoy and Lynda Oswald, Navigating Incomplete Harmonization: Businesses and The Utility Model Environment, in Jorge L. Contreras (ed.), Sub-Patent Innovation Rights: Utility Models, Petty Patents and Innovation Patents Around the World. (Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press (avail. Feb. 2025).

Eric Claeys, “Choice of Law in Takings Case After Tyler v. Hennepin County (III),” Reason Magazine (January 22, 2025)

Mark Cohen, “Ac[c]ess Advance and TCL: A Submission to the Shenzhen Court,” China IPR (November 4, 2024)

Mark Cohen, “EU Initiates Consultations at the WTO on Chinese Global FRAND Rate Setting,” China IPR (January 20, 2025)

Mark Cohen, “Some Observations on SAMR’s New Antimonopoly Guidelines for SEPs,” China IPR (November 20, 2024)

Mark A. Cohen, Statement of Mark Cohen … Before the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet of the Committee of the Judiciary hearing: IP and Strategic Competition with China: Part IV – Patents, Standards, and Lawfare, December 18, 2024

Mark Cohen and Denis Simon, “Bridging the Divide: It Is Time for a New Science Agreement with China,” Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft (December 10, 2025)

Loletta Darden, USPTO Trademark Law and Practice, First Edition, Aspen Publishing (2024)

Tabrez Ebrahim, Corpus Linguistics at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (December 17, 2024)

Tabrez Ebrahim and Rafeel Wasif, Innovation Originators (December 06, 2024)

Jon M. Garon, Encyclopedia Entry, Child Privacy and Smart Toys, Encyclopedia of Intellectual Property Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2024) (forthcoming)

Christopher M. Holman, Copyright Law: Cases and Materials, First Edition, CALI eLangdell® Press (2025)

Christopher M. Holman, The Evolving Grace Period for U.S. Patent Applicants, 43 Biotechnology Law Report 301 (2024)

Andrei Iancu & David Kappos, Co-Chairs, Council for Innovation Promotion (C4IP), “A Reality Check for Patent Quality Critics,” The Well News (January 22, 2025)

Johnathon Edward Liddicoat, Gabriela Lenarczyk, Mateo Aboy, Timo Minssen & Sebastian Porsdam Mann, A policy framework for leveraging generative AI to address enduring challenges in clinical trials, npj Digital Medicine (January 15, 2025)

Daryl Lim, Determinants of Socially Responsible AI Governance, 25 Duke L. & Tech.

Rev. 183 (January 27, 2025)

Daryl Lim, Trademark Confusion Revealed: An Empirical Analysis, 114 TMR 1147 (2024)

[Revised] William Matcham and Mark Schankerman, Screening Property Rights for Innovation (January 13, 2025)

Dr. Christine McDaniel, “Litigation Financing: A National Security Threat Or Lifeline For Startups?” Forbes (December 6, 2024)

Michael D. Murray, AI Pirated my Art and Birthed Infringing Works, and Other Metaphors that Confound Copyright Law (January 24, 2025)

Michael D. Murray, Deceptive Exploitation: Deepfakes, the Rights of Publicity and Privacy, and Trademark Law (October 09, 2024). IDEA®: THE LAW REVIEW OF THE FRANKLIN PIERCE CENTER FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY [VOL. 65]

Kristen Osenga, “What Congress and the Trump Administration Must Do to Defend Patent Rights,” IAM (February 8, 2025) [also on Imperial Valley Press, NewsBreak, and The Enterprise/Restoration News Media]

Kristen Jakobsen Osenga, Written Testimony of Kristen Jakobsen Osenga … Before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate: The RESTORE Patent Rights Act: Restoring America’s Status as the Global IP Leader, December 18, 2024

Michael Risch, Amicus Brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC: “Brief for Professor Michael Risch and the Group of Interested Practitioners as Amicus Curiae in Support of EcoFactor” (files January 24 2025)

Alexandra J. Roberts, “Does IP Law Protect Influencers’ Aesthetics?–Gifford v. Sheil (Guest Blog Post),” Technology & Marketing Law Blog (December 13, 2024)

Alexandra J. Roberts, Of Marks and Minors, 62 Hous. L. Rev. 307 (2024)

Zvi S. Rosen, “Were Works by Slaves Eligible for Copyright? A Case Study of Frederick Douglass,” Mostly IP History (December 30, 2024)

Zvi S. Rosen, “What Does John Cage Have to Do with AI Authorship?” Mostly IP History (November 29, 2024)

Zvi Rosen and Kevin M. Zielisnki, “What to Do With Dewberry?: SCOTUS Decides Dewberry Group v. Dewberry Engineers”, FedSoc Blog (February 28, 2025)

Zvi S. Rosen, Who Framed Mickey Mouse? (March 01, 2024). 73 Kan. L. Rev. 41 (2024)

Eds. Mark Schultz, Emily Michiko Morris, Sandra Barbosu, and Stephen Ezell, “Innovate4Health: The Power of Intellectual Property and Innovation in Solving Global Health Challenges,” ITIF | University of Akron School of Law Center for Intellectual Property Law & Technology (UAIP) | Geneva Network (December 2024) [December 4 press release for report]

Brenda M. Simon, Bespoke Regulation of Artificial Intelligence (March 01, 2024). Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (forthcoming)

TCL v. Access Advance, Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court, Intellectual Property Division – Brief of Randall R. Rader, David J. Kappos and Mark A. Cohen (U.S. October 2024) [more information at China IPR]

John R. Thomas & Christopher Holman, Thomas and Holman on Pharmaceutical Patent Law (ebook), Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc. (2024) [Treatise; available only with Bloomberg Law Subscription]

Hannah Weiser & Daniel R. Cahoy, Joke or Counterfeit? Balancing Trademark Parody and Consumer Safety in the Edibles Market. 62(1) American Business Law Journal (2025)

Categories
Biotech Patent Law Patent Licensing Patents Pharma

Pharmaceutical “Nominal Patent Life” Versus “Effective Patent Life,” Revisited

By Emily Michiko Morris and Joshua Kresh

Executive summary: Many critics of pharmaceutical companies argue that they abuse the patent system through “evergreening” or “thickets” to increase the amount of time they can avoid generic competition and keep drug prices high. Those critics have not looked at the real-world effects of pharmaceutical patents on generic entry, however. Our review of actual time to generic entry for more than one hundred of 2012’s top-selling drugs shows that:

    • The average effective patent life, as opposed to nominal patent life, of our dataset is 13.35 years, consistent previous studies on effective patent life;
    • Patents and exclusivities added to the Orange Book after a drug’s market entry does little to extend effective patent life; and
    • The number of patents protecting a brand-name drug has no significant correlation with effective patent life.

Thus, our study suggests that “evergreening” does not stop generic entry and that “thickets”—if they even exist—appear to be rather easy to circumvent.


The topic on everyone’s minds lately is drug prices and the fact that most Americans believe that drug prices in the United States are too high. Drug prices, like other health care costs, are a multifactorial and incredibly complex subject. Most of the current discussion on drug prices focuses on the role of patent protections, however, to the exclusion of almost everything else. In particular, a major criticism of the pharmaceutical industry is that it is abusing the patent system by filing for serial patents to prolong its ability to charge supracompetitive prices for the drugs that it has developed.

To prove the existence of such “evergreening” through patents, a number of studies focus on nominal patent life, based on the expected expiration date of the last patent on a given set of drugs. The later the expiration date, according to evergreening theory, the longer a brand-name drug can fend off entry by price-lowering generic versions. The most well-known—and certainly the most thorough—study applying this approach is Prof. Robin Feldman’s “Evergreen Drug Patent Database” (often informally referred to as the “Hastings Database,” after UC Law San Francisco’s former name).

The Hastings Database contains an exhaustive list of not only all patents but also any regulatory exclusivities granted by the FDA, both of which can stall generic drug approval and thus market entry as well. The Database then identifies “evergreening” by looking at how many additional patents or exclusivities are added to the “Orange Book,” the FDA’s list of patents and exclusivities that pharmaceutical companies assert cover their brand-name small-molecule drugs (SMDs).[1] Specifically, the Hastings Database counts how many patents and exclusivities are added after what the database labels as the “protection cliff” for each drug, as defined by all patents and exclusivities added to the Orange Book by two months after FDA approval.[2] According to the Hastings Database’s calculations, companies extend the patent lives of their drugs for several years by adding such later filed patents and exclusivities.

This calculation presents merely the nominal patent life of a given drug, however, not the period of time during which patents actually protect a drug from generic market entry. The latter, or effective patent life, is a more accurate and more meaningful measure of how long brand-name drug companies can fend off generic market entry. Unlike nominal patent life, effective patent life (EPL) does not focus on patent terms. Instead, EPL focuses on the time between a brand-name drug’s approval and first market entry and generic market entry because this is the only time in which the brand-name company might be able to charge supracompetitive prices. The differences between nominal patent life and effective patent life can be quite large, as generics often enter the market regardless of whether the brand-name still has patent term remaining.[3] This is a point that many earlier studies have shown.[4]

To reaffirm this point, we did our own study of the nominal patent lives listed in the Hastings Database. For our sample set, we looked at the top-selling small-molecule drug products from 2012, based on the idea that flagship brand-name products are most likely to draw generic market entry and that drugs from 2012 would now have had twelve years in which generics could do so. To select the drug products for our sample, we used the list of the top 200 drugs by total U.S. retail sales in 2012 assembled by the Njardarson Group at the University of Arizona.[5] After we eliminated any biologics, as well as any SMDs not included in the Hastings Database, we had a sample size of 131 drug products.

We then added data from the Hastings Database. These data included each drug product’s FDA approval date, the expiration dates for both the earliest and latest patent or regulatory exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for each drug product, and each product’s “protection cliff” dates. We also included any further time past those protection cliff dates that the Hastings Database identifies added by patents or exclusivities beyond those that comprise each protection cliff. This latter set of data, which the Hastings Database labels as “Additional Prot(ection) Time,” is important because it is how Hastings calculates alleged “evergreening.”

To these data from the Hastings Database we then added data from other resources as well: both the date on which each Reference List Drug (RLD) began marketing (i.e., the date on which the relevant brand name entered the market), and similarly the date on which the first generic for each RLD entered the market. We added these market entry dates from the earliest listed dates included in the National Drug Code Directory’s Structured Product Labeling Resources (SPL) database[6] for the earliest approved New Drug Application (NDA) listed in the Hastings Database. (A large number of drug products have multiple NDAs and multiple market entry dates, so we used the earliest RLD market entry dates for the earliest approved NDAs to err on the side of the longest EPLs for each product.) Based on these dates, we calculated the EPL for each drug product based on the time between the product’s first marketing date and the date on which the first generic for that product entered the market.

Because the Hastings Database defines evergreening as protection beyond its “protection cliff” rather than as nominal patent life, we computed two further datapoints. First, to compare directly with the Hastings Database’s “Additional Prot(ection) Time,” we also calculated EPL based not on RLD market entry dates but on Hastings’ protection cliff dates—that is, we calculated the effective patent life for each drug product beyond its protection cliff. This allowed us to compare what is in effect Hastings’ nominal “Additional Prot(ection) Time” with what is in effect our sample’s effective “Additional Prot(ection) Time.” Second, to make the Hastings Database more comparable with nominal patent life (NPL) determinations in other studies, we also derived the NPL for each drug product based on the time between its RLD market entry date and the latest expiration date of any patent or exclusivity listed in the Hastings Database for the product.

Our analysis of our sample set is ongoing, but some of the initial results are significant. Not surprisingly, the average EPL from our sample—including the 14 drug products for which the FDA currently lists no generic versions—is several years shorter than the average NPL we computed from the Hastings Database. The average NPL from Hastings is 19.14 years (median = 19.20), but the average EPL from our sample is 13.35 years (median = 14.01). Our sample’s average EPL is thus consistent with EPLs from other studies.

More interesting, however, is that our sample’s average effective “Additional Prot(ection) Time”—1.61 years (median = 1.19)—is also much shorter than Hastings’ nominal “Additional Prot(ection) Time”—13.34 years (median = 13.52). In other words, the effective patent life of our sample, on average, extends only 1.61 years past Hastings’ “protection cliff.” This means that most of the mean EPL from our sample stems from the patents and exclusivities that comprise Hastings’ protection cliff (those listed in the Orange Book up to two months after FDA approval). This in turn shows that if, as is frequently claimed, patents and exclusivities are later added for brand-name drug products simply to avoid their protection cliffs, that particular tactic is ineffective.[7]

That being said, many of the drug products in our sample may have had shortened EPLs because generics were able to enter the market early through Paragraph IV certifications contesting either the infringement or validity of the latest expiring patents for those drugs. We therefore looked at the approval letters for as many of the earliest entering generics as we could find on the Drugs@FDA: FDA-Approved Drugs online database. The FDA’s approval letters typically include whether the approved generic has filed a Paragraph IV challenge and which patents it were challenging. We were able to pull up generic approval letters for 87 of the drug products in our sample. Of those products, 16 either faced no Paragraph IV challenges at all or at least none challenging the latest expiring patent. For another 26 of the 87 drug products, their patent owners did not sue the first-to-file generic even though the generic filed a Paragraph IV challenge to the latest expiring patent. This does not mean that the first-to-file generic did not itself then file a declaratory judgment action against the latest expiring or other patents, but it does mean that the patent owner did not think it worthwhile to sue the Paragraph IV generic early enough to obtain a 30-month stay on that generic’s FDA approval. Several of the 87 products, however, had multiple first-to-enter generics entering the market on the same day, but the FDA database did not display the approval letters for all those generics. We may therefore be underestimating the number of products that faced Paragraph IV challenges.

It is also possible that the time needed to resolve Paragraph IV challenges by itself may have delayed generic entry in many cases. Similarly, it is possible that the mere existence of later-expiring patents deterred potential generics from even trying to enter the market early. We therefore used Hastings’ raw data to derive the number of patents protecting each drug product in our sample. We counted all individual patents listed, treating any pediatric extension, patent term restoration, or other patent term extension as a separate patent if it had the potential to extend nominal patent life. We then looked for any correlation between the number of patents per drug product and the effective patent life for each product but found no statistically significant difference from a null hypothesis of zero correlation. This again suggests that simply adding more patents, regardless of whether they are listed in the Orange Book later or earlier, is not an effective tactic for delaying generic market entry.

Perhaps most significantly, our findings suggest once again that looking at only patents and patent terms reveals little to nothing about how long brand-name drug products can stave off generic entry. Nominal patent life, for example, tells us little about the actual effect patents have because nominal patent life fails to consider the scope of each patent. Many patents, especially later-filed patents, on new indications for which a drug patent can be used or new ways of manufacturing a product, can either be carved out of a generic’s FDA application or designed around. Even new dosage patents may not stop generic entry if physicians can simply split or multiply the dosage of a generic to achieve the newly patented dosage. Much the same can be said of new formulation patents as well. And even if other types of patents can be avoided only through Paragraph IV challenges, these challenges may have little effect in extending effective patent life, as suggested by our data.


[1] Small-molecule drugs are small and simple substances that can be synthesized though chemical reactions, unlike “biologics,” which are a relatively new class of therapeutics that are much larger and more complex molecules that are synthesizable only through biological processes.

[2] The Hastings Database also calculates for each drug the length of time between the expiration of its first patent or regulatory exclusivity and the expiration of its last.

[3] See, e.g., C. Scott Hemphill & Bhaven N. Sampat, When Do Generics Challenge Drug Patents?, 8 J. Empirical L. Stud. 613, 643 (2011) (noting that effective patent lives are shorter than nominal patent lives).

[4] See, e.g., Henry G. Grabowski et al., Continuing Trends in U.S. brand-Name and Generic Drug Competition, 24 J. Med. Econ. 908, 916 (2021) (calculating to EPL – or “market exclusivity period” (MEP) – as only 13.0 to 14.1 years for new chemical entities); C. Scott Hemphill & Bhaven M. Sampat, 31 J. Health Econ. 327, 330 (2012) (finding EPL of 12.15 years versus NPL of 15.89 years for new chemical entities).

[5] chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://sites.arizona.edu/njardarson-lab/files/2023/11/Top-200-Pharmaceutical-Products-by-US-Retail-Sales-in-2011_small_0.pdf.

[6] https://www.fda.gov/industry/structured-product-labeling-resources/nsde

[7] The difference between average EPL and NPL for the products in our sample is statistically significant, based on a paired two-tail t-test with p value <<0.01. The same is true of the difference between effective and nominal “Additional Prot(ection) Time” for our sample.

Categories
Uncategorized

Using Economic Models to Evaluate the Efficacy of U.S. Patent Examination

By William Matcham

For the Center for Intellectual Property x Innovation Policy blog, in fulfillment of obligations for the Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship


Folder tab reading "Patents"

Highlights:

    • Policymakers frequently debate the effectiveness of the U.S. patent system – critics claim that problems arise from the ineffective patent application and examination process.
    • We fill a large gap in the economics literature by building an economic model of the patent prosecution process.
    • The model implies that patent screening is relatively effective, in large part because the examiners are well motivated. However, restrictions on negotiations could improve screening outcomes.
    • We view our work as the first part of a broader research agenda assessing the effectiveness of resource allocation in public agencies that incentivize and fund innovation.

The Importance of Public Institutions in Fostering Innovation

In a forthcoming research article, Mark Schankerman and I estimate an economic model to evaluate the effectiveness of patent screening at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Part of a broader research program, the project shows how economic models can be used to study and improve the efficiency of resource allocation by innovation-related public agencies. I worked towards writing this paper in conjunction with the George Mason University Scalia School of Law’s 2022-2023 Thomas Edison Innovation Law and Policy Fellowship. I am very grateful for the thoughtful comments I received from Distinguished Commentators and scholars involved with the Fellowship.

Public agencies play a central role in fostering innovation through two primary channels: direct and indirect funding of public and private research, and allocating intellectual property rights, specifically patents. In the United States, for example, federal investment in Research and Development (R&D) activities amounted to $120.9B in 2015 alone. Moreover, nearly 400,000 patents were issued by the USPTO in the same year.

Despite their evident importance, little is known about whether innovation-supporting public institutions allocate resources efficiently and how organizational changes affect agency performance. In our first project on this topic, we study the U.S. patent system, focusing on the quality of screening—the allocation of property rights for innovation— by the Patent Office.

The Growing Policy Debate

The effectiveness of patent screening and its implications for the quality of patents is a hotly debated policy issue. There is growing concern among academic scholars and policymakers that patent rights are becoming an impediment rather than an incentive to innovation. These concerns have been prominently voiced in public debates, in recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and culminating in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011, the most significant statutory change to the patent system in half a century.

Critics of the patent system claim that the problems arise mainly from ineffective USPTO screening, where patents are granted to inventions that do not represent a substantial inventive step—especially in emerging technology areas such as business methods and software. The issue is essential because granting “excessive” patent rights imposes social costs: higher prices and restricted quantities of patented goods, greater enforcement (litigation) costs, increased transaction costs of R&D, and the potential to undermine the process of cumulative innovation.

What We Do

We develop an economic model of the patent screening process, which incorporates incentives and intrinsic motivation of examiners and the actual structure of multi-round negotiation in the current system. By intrinsic motivation, we mean examiners’ desire to ensure their decisions align with the USPTO’s mission, which is to award inventors property rights over their invention, consistent with statutory and judicial prescriptions. We estimate the model using new negotiation-round-level data on examiner decisions and text data from 20 million patent claims. We conduct counterfactual, “what-if” analysis of how reforms to incentives, fees, and the structure of negotiations affect the quality and speed of patent screening.

Advantages and Uniqueness of Our Analytical Framework

The patent prosecution process is an advantageous context to study the effects of incentives and motivation on screening for two primary reasons. First, the multi-round negotiation between the applicant and examiner fits naturally into a specific economic modeling tool called a “dynamic game,” which forms the basis of our model. The model is “dynamic” in the sense that we allow multiple negotiations over time between the examiner and the applicant, and a “game” in the sense that both examiner and applicant make decisions that account for how the opposing party will respond. Such a model is necessary in this context because existing empirical (so-called reduced form) analyses are not capable of analyzing how examiners and applicants would both respond to changes in the patent screening regime. For this one needs a full model of the process, capable of doing such counterfactual analyses.

The second advantage of the patent context is the quality of data. The USPTO collects detailed data on all applications, not just granted patents. For this paper, we constructed a dataset covering around 55 million patent application decisions across 20 million patent claims between 2010-2015. For applications, we observe each examiner’s decision on each patent claim over all rounds of the negotiation. Advanced natural language processing (NLP) techniques assist us in measuring the “distance” between different patents, an important metric for understanding strategic behaviors by both applicants and examiners. Together with the characteristics of examiners and applicants, we use these data to estimate our model of the patent application process.

Key Findings

Our estimates imply several key empirical findings; we focus here on two of the core insights:

    1. Intrinsic motivation plays a significant role in contributing to the accuracy of patent screening. Junior examiners are more motivated than seniors on average, but there is considerable variation within both groups. Further, using the estimated parameters, counterfactual analysis shows that removing intrinsic motivation increases the frequency of examiners granting invalid patents fourfold. This finding highlights the importance of designing human resource policies that effectively select examiners with high intrinsic motivation and ensure they sustain this motivation throughout their careers.
    2. Innovators pad their patent applications, but the examination process screens much of this out. By this, we mean that applicants initially claim greater property rights than are warranted by the true “inventive step” of their innovation. Moreover, there is substantial variation in the degree of padding across patent applications. This result highlights the importance of effective screening. We estimate the average level of padding at around 8-10%. This exaggerated scope of the patent applications, in turn, implies that approximately 80% of claims start below the distance threshold for patentability and thus should be rejected. The multi-round screening process substantially narrows the scope of patent rights sought and, in so doing, reduces that number to about 7% among granted claims (though nearly one in five granted patents contains at least one patent claim that does not meet the threshold).

Reforms to the Patent Screening Process

Our counterfactual experiments reveal the effects of a range of specific policy changes the USPTO could consider. To take one example, limiting the negotiation rounds would substantially reduce the granting of invalid patents and, naturally, improve the speed of prosecution. However, such a limit would force abandonments by applicants who only need to make moderate adjustments to meet the required standards. This in turn could dissuade inventors from developing their valuable ideas in the first place. On net, we find that the benefits of reducing negotiation rounds outweigh the costs, suggesting that rounds restrictions are worthy of consideration.

Concluding Remarks

Our study serves as an important first piece of research highlighting the crucial role of intrinsic motivation in public agencies, particularly in the context of innovation-promoting institutions. It exposes the complex trade-off between the speed and quality of application processing and applicants’ incentives to innovate. We believe this work lays a strong foundation for further academic inquiry into the efficiency of resource allocation in innovation-supporting public agencies.