Blog

The RESTORE Patent Rights Act, introduced in July by a bipartisan group of senators and representatives, would be a pivotal legislative milestone for promoting innovation, if enacted into law. This bill would reestablish injunctive relief as the default legal remedy for patent infringement, preventing patent infringers from using others’ IP and ultimately facing little more

C4IP is recognizing Shuji Nakamura, who enabled modern-day electronics with his invention of the blue LED. Nakamura was born in 1954 in Ehime, Japan, and was working as a scientist for Japanese company Nichia Chemical when he became intrigued by light-emitting diodes (LEDs), which at the time could only emit red or green light and

C4IP Co-Chairs and former USPTO Directors Andrei Iancu and David Kappos recently published an opinion piece in RealClear Health highlighting the unintended consequences that would arise if the Medication Affordability and Patent Integrity Act (MAPIA) is passed by Congress and signed into law. Supporters of the bill argue that drug companies take advantage of a

September was a productive month for C4IP! Here’s a roundup of all that we accomplished over the past month. September Highlights: Advancing the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) remains one of the most important innovation policy reforms on the legislative agenda. This bill would promote research and investment in high-tech

Strong, consistent IP protections throughout U.S. history enabled the creation of innovative and useful technologies that we use regularly today. From clothing to cleaning, every aspect of our lives has benefited greatly from IP, as shown by these historical examples from the month of September: 1938: On September 20, Wallace Carothers received a patent for

The Medication Affordability and Patent Integrity Act, introduced by Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Mike Braun (R-IN), would require life sciences innovators to share volumes of unnecessary and confidential information related to drug approval with the USPTO. Under the bill, firms would also have to provide lengthy certifications stating that all information submitted to the

C4IP Co-Chairs and former USPTO Directors Andrei Iancu and David Kappos recently published an opinion piece in Fortune about how Big Tech firms have weaponized the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to steal smaller companies’ patents — and how the PREVAIL Act would solve this. Since the creation of the PTAB in 2011, Big

This month, C4IP is recognizing Frederic Eugene Ives, whose prolific inventions pioneered several technological leaps in photography. Ives was born in 1856 in Litchfield, Connecticut, and became involved with photography from a young age – first as an apprentice at the Litchfield Enquirer, and later as a leader of the photographic laboratory at Cornell University.

C4IP board member and retired federal judge Kathleen O’Malley recently published a new opinion piece in World Intellectual Property Review on how the proposed NO FAKES Act would help guard creators’ and artists’ intellectual property against the misuse of emerging AI technology. The Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act would

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

Strong, consistent IP protections throughout U.S. history enabled the creation of innovative and useful technologies that we use regularly today. From frozen food to bridge construction, every aspect of our lives has benefited greatly from IP, as shown by these historical examples from the month of August: 1931: On August 18, Henry Bosenberg received the

On May 9, 2024, the USPTO issued a notice of proposed rulemaking adding a new requirement for filing terminal disclaimers, which are generally used to allow inventors to receive multiple patents stemming from the same patent application. This allows inventors to obtain an initial patent quickly if there is agreement with the examiner that some