Journal of Arbitration Studies (한국중재학회지:중재연구)

The Korean Association of Arbitration Studies (한국중재학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

KCAB's Arbitration of U.S. Patent Exhaustion Disputes Over Artificial Intelligence and Internet of Things Technologies

  • Received : 2018.08.10
  • Accepted : 2018.08.28
  • Published : 2018.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Technological innovations can be protected by patents, and patent applications are filed in various patent offices around the world including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Recently, the U.S. exportation of artificial intelligence and internet of things patents in the form of foreign sales of articles embodying U.S. patents and international technology licenses has grown substantially. However, due to the U.S. Supreme Court's Lexmark decision reconfirming an international patent exhaustion doctrine, the asian or korean importers importing such U.S. goods embodying U.S. patents do not have to worry about patent infringement liability, even when they try to resell the patented goods to the third parties. KCAB can play a substantial role in resolving such patent disputes due to qualified expert arbitrators and the International Rules of KCAB which ensure impartiality and independence of the arbitrators.

Keywords

References

  1. Bender, Jr., Raymond G., "Arbitration - An Ideal Way to Resolve High-Tech Industry Disputes", Dispute Resolution Journal, Vol. 65 at 44; 2011.
  2. European Commission, "The Internet of Things", (Oct. 2013) available at https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/policies/internet-things.
  3. Ghafele, Roya, "What Young Innovative Companies Want: Formulating Bottom-Up Patent Policy For the Internet of Things", NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law, Vol. 7 at 85; 2017.
  4. Holt, L. Tyrone, "Whither Arbitration? What Can Be Done to Improve Arbitration and Keep Out Litigation's Ill Effects," 7(3) DePaul Bus. & Com. L.J. 455, 463 (2009).
  5. Hornick, John F., "Trade Secrets: What Your Company Needs to Know," IP Litigator 1 (July/August 2004), available at www.finnegan.com/resources/articles.
  6. Kemp, Richard, "Legal Aspects of Artificial Intelligence", Cyberspace Lawyer, Vol. 22 at 2; 2017.
  7. Kim, Dookyu, "Intellectual Property in the Fourth Industrial Revolution Era", les Nouvelles, Vol. 53 at 20; 2018.
  8. Kim, Kap-You, The Procedural Benefits of Arbitrating Patent Disputes, Arbitral Studies, Vol. 26, No.3, pp. 51-66(2016). https://doi.org/10.16998/jas.2016.26.3.51
  9. Lee, Ju-Yeon, Identifying Effective Dispute Resolution Mechanisms for Intellectual Property Disputes in the International Context, Arbitral Studies, Vol. 25, No.3, pp. 155-184(2015). https://doi.org/10.16998/jas.2015.25.3.155
  10. LexInnova, "The Internet of Things: Patent Landscape Analysis", (Nov. 2014), available at http://www.lex-innova.com/resources-reports/?id=33.
  11. Robinson, W. Keith, "Patent Law Challenges For the Internet of Things", Wake Forest Journal of Business and Intellectual Property Law, Vol 15 at 655; 2015.
  12. Robinson, W. Keith, Smith, Joshua T., "Emerging Technologies Challenging Current Legal Paradigms", Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, Vol. 19 at 355; 2018.
  13. Tung, Liam, "Microsoft's newest milestone? World's lowest error rate in speech recognition", ZDNet.com (14 Sept. 2016), available at http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-newest-milestone-worlds-lowest-error-rate-in-speech-recognition/.
  14. Impression Prods. v. Lexmark Int'l, Inc., 137 S.Ct 546(2016).
  15. Korean Patent Court 2009.12.18. 2008Hur13299.
  16. Quanta Computers, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 553 U.S. 618 (2008).