tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2977297931731346524.post1397337152185763782..comments2024-03-26T13:13:25.033-04:00Comments on Written Description: Patent Publication & Default RulesLisa Larrimore Ouellettehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18401005012430355377noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2977297931731346524.post-4642208069033941262012-11-15T11:54:04.976-05:002012-11-15T11:54:04.976-05:00As noted by @design_law (Sarah Burstein) on Twitte...As noted by <a href="https://twitter.com/design_law/status/269106011078524929" rel="nofollow">@design_law (Sarah Burstein) on Twitter</a>, a rational reason for choosing disclosure is the availability of pre-issuance damages under <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/154" rel="nofollow">35 U.S.C. § 154(d)</a>. Graham and Hegde also note this, in footnote 13 of their current draft. They also "speculate that pre‐grant disclosure benefits small inventors by allowing them to publicize their inventions’ existence, quality and scope to competitors, external investors and potential licensees."Lisa Larrimore Ouellettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18401005012430355377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2977297931731346524.post-32312551171194299202012-11-15T11:19:23.561-05:002012-11-15T11:19:23.561-05:00Note that the authors' finding that small inve...Note that the authors' finding that small inventors are more likely to choose disclosure for their most important inventions (when they are presumably most likely to pay attention to their patent applications and to disclosure rules) suggests a real preference for disclosure, rather than simply the effect of default rules. Which, of course, makes the argument for moving up the default publication date even stronger!Lisa Larrimore Ouellettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18401005012430355377noreply@blogger.com