Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
How to Diversify the Pool of Inventors — and Improve Innovation
Every February, well-meaning people highlight achievements by African American inventors and innovators as part of Black History Month. In our field of patent law, we and our colleagues often receive online tidbits about inventors like George Washington Carver (peanut butter), Charles Drew (blood banking), Garrett Morgan (traffic lights), Marie Van Brittan Brown (home security systems) and Shirley Jackson (telecommunications technology), among others.
This periodic reminder often spurs interesting discussions surrounding innovation in general and the inventive minds that set innovation in motion. We wish such discussions occurred more frequently throughout the other 11 months of the year, especially since the pool of inventors awarded United States patents is dominated by white men. For example, the Congressional Research Service reports that only 12.8% of patents are held by women inventors. Further, although the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) doesn't record racial data of patent holders, a study from 1970 to 2006 showed that Black inventors secured a small fraction (only 2.5%) of the number of patents secured by white inventors in that timeframe.
Efforts to diversify the inventive population will not only foster innovation across a wide range of businesses and industries but will also help greatly expand the pool of inventors across racial, gender and ethnic categories. The country as a whole will realize numerous benefits, such as expanded, unique and better-targeted products for a wider range of consumers, a sense of directly impacting ones' personal interest from within these diverse communities, and increased access to mentors and advisors from heretofore neglected communities.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?