August was a productive month for C4IP! Here’s a roundup of all that we accomplished over the past month.
August Highlights: Supporting the RESTORE Patent Rights Act
Inventors depend on strong patent rights to ensure that they can invest in research and development and know that their innovations – once successful – won’t be immediately copied and sold by others without permission. In the court system, the best way to meaningfully guarantee this kind of protection is through injunctions – legal orders that require adjudged infringers to stop utilizing the patented invention. However, inventors’ right to an injunction has eroded over the past two decades. Monetary damages have replaced injunctions as the main legal remedy for patent infringement, allowing large companies to steal patents without significant consequences. The difficulty of obtaining injunctions today has weakened patent rights and made innovation much riskier, especially for small inventors – putting our entire innovation system at risk.
In late July, a bipartisan group of senators and representatives led by Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Tom Cotton (R-AR) introduced the RESTORE Patent Rights Act, which would codify that injunctions should be routinely granted as a final remedy after a patent is found valid and infringed in court. Throughout August, C4IP was heavily involved in advocating for this reform:
- Former U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke published an opinion essay in the Financial Times explaining how PERA, the PREVAIL Act, and the RESTORE Patent Rights Act would modernize our patent system to help innovative companies thrive.
“This [ambiguity of the guidance] devalues the entire corpus of AI-assisted patents, discouraging innovation and inviting infringement suits from well-resourced litigants.”
- Netlist founder and CEO Chuck Hong published an opinion essay in Fortune detailing his experience of having patents stolen by Google and advocating for the PREVAIL Act and RESTORE Patent Rights Act as ways to prevent future predatory infringement.
“Congress has shown an interest in regulating Big Tech on matters of antitrust, privacy, misinformation, and child protection. They should also add patent infringement to this list.”
- Colorado College Professor Kristina M. L. Acri published an opinion essay in the Denver Post spotlighting the alarming decline in injunctions since eBay v. MercExchange, which the passage of the RESTORE Patent Rights Act would rectify.
- C4IP Chief Policy Officer and Counsel Jamie Simpson was quoted in a Bloomberg Law article on the importance of passing the RESTORE Patent Rights Act and reversing eBay v. MercExchange.
Additional Coalition Updates
- On August 22, C4IP Board Member Judge Kathleen O’Malley (Ret.) published an opinion essay in the World Intellectual Property Review arguing that, in the digital age, the NO FAKES Act would preserve the incentives that drive creative expression — while ensuring that our identities, our art, and our innovations remain our own.
- On August 16, C4IP Co-Chair and former USPTO Director David Kappos published an opinion essay in the San Francisco Chronicle explaining how strong patent protections have been responsible for the continuous improvement of GLP-1 drugs.
- On August 14, C4IP Chief Policy Officer and Counsel Jamie Simpson was quoted in a Bloomberg Law article on a recent lawsuit involving voice actors that exemplifies the need for the NO FAKES Act.
- On August 5, IP attorney and expert Michael Gulliford published an opinion essay in Law360 underscoring the confusion caused by unpredictable patent eligibility criteria and urging the passage of PERA as a solution.
- On August 2, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen issued a statement endorsing the NO FAKES Act of 2024 and explaining how it would uphold the intellectual property rights of artists and creators.
- On August 1, former USPTO Deputy Director Coke Stewart published an opinion essay in RealClearHealth exploring how a second Trump administration’s patent policies would help protect the rights of inventors.