Sarah Rajec

A bit too late, from the rooster's perspective anyways.

Thank you so much to Irene Calboli for hosting the 10th International IP Roundtable. It was two days of intense and energizing discussion that showcased the expertise and deep knowledge of this great group of colleagues and friends. (Plus, there was a giant sparkly cowboy hat.)

Looks interesting--I clicked through and was immediately offered an AI summary of the paper, because of course I was.

Are we doing book swag???

This may explain why I feel toddler-type frustration and want to yell "I DO IT" at the screen when it happens...

[Guest post] The enduring importance of territoriality in patent rights – Lessons from the WTO Arbitrators in China - Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective.

A rare appellate report (through the MPIA because the WTO Appellate Body is still on hold) in a TRIPS case, this one about the use of anti suit injunctions in SEP cases in China. My initial take on it: ipkitten.blogspot.com/2025/07/gues...

Both were about nourishing roots, I guess? But... one was the roots of a genre of music and the other was leguminous veggies, with is a tough gap to bridge.

Grammatically, it seems to be calling "critical race theory" an activity on its own, grouped with "training," "assessments," "hiring," etc.. I guess the theorizing itself is unlawful, even if you don't write it down? (Or, & I'm going out on a limb here, this is poorly-written & unclear.)

This is HUGE.

Get excited: @sarahrajec.bsky.social, @apublicgood.bsky.social, and I are officially revising our (free) patent casebook!

Version 2 will be available this fall, in time for use in Spring 2026.

Had a great time at the M^3 conference at Chicago Kent discussing all things IP and IP-adjacent! Huge thanks to Sarah Fackrell and Cathay Smith for hosting!

I read "mischief" your way and I like it. "Wreaks havoc" is much more aggressive, but maybe "sows confusion" or I guess you could say something has counterintuitive results?

I was honored to deliver the Blackstone Lecture yesterday at William & Mary Law School, and grateful to my colleagues and students who attended!

Enjoyed taking my W&M patent law class for arguments at the Federal Circuit, then having them meet with a judge from the Federal Circuit & one from the Court of Federal Claims.
Highlights were one judge referencing Seinfeld (O’Brien ep) & another working in an 867-5309/Jenny hypo on 101 arguments.

My earlier work on this. (7/7 -fin) digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol76/is...

This is especially relevant for the United States as “an IP-exporter in both copyright and patent-heavy industries.” These industries would likely “exert their influence and encourage the lifting of tariffs if faced with the potential loss of their IP rights abroad.” (6/7)

As I suggest above, Wasserman Rajec agrees that an important aspect of allowing retaliation through different WTO agreement suspensions is that “countries that may not pose much threat through tariffs imposition can pose a threat to industries that are important to a violator country economy.” (5/7)

Despite the practical challenges of implementing IP rights suspensions, Professor Wasserman Rajec suggests that “just having the blueprint of IP-rights suspension may prove useful to countries that are trying to remind the United States of just how interconnected our industries all are.” (4/7)

including “the difficulty of implementing targeted suspension of IP rights” and the challenge smaller economies face in achieving “a level of IP-rights suspension that will compensate their losses due to tariffs.” (3/7)

As Rajec has observed, in the 3 cases where non-tariff countermeasures in IP rights suspension have been approved by the WTO, none ultimately resulted in the actual suspension of IP rights. She suggests several reasons for this, (2/7)

Non-Tariff Countermeasures to U.S. Tariff Hikes: IP, Services, and Investment Implications by Dennis Crouch In April 2025, President Trump took initiative to sharply increased tariffs on imports, citing trade imbalances and …

Dennis Crouch and I corresponded this week. A few excerpts, cut down (1/7):
As Prof Wasserman Rajec has noted, “the threat to suspend intellectual property rights in response to unrelated trade violations” has gained attention as a potential countermeasure.
patentlyo.com/patent/2025/...

Fight!
#EverTrue

This patent makes me think we should bring back the moral utility doctrine... I mean, the depravity of bathing in sprinkles!

No Copyright for Birkenstock Sandals, Says German Court Germany's Federal Court of Justice ruled that Birkenstock sandals are not works of art and are not entitled to copyright protection.

www.thefashionlaw.com/birkenstock-...

Dagan & Van Houweling on Copyright Reversion, https://buff.ly/4jZogPX - Hanoch Dagan (University of California, Berkeley) & Molly S. Van Houweling (University of California, Berkeley) has posted Reconstructing Copyright Reversion: Releasing Authors from Their Own Dead Hands on SSRN.

Congratulations!

New CAFed decision upholds Ravgen's fetal DNA testing patent, finding no obviousness in combining known cffDNA testing with use of formaldehyde to prevent degradation. 2003 patent filing date. patentlyo.com/patent/2025/...

Is the skin serum something you rub on your earlobes to go from unattached to attached earlobes? (Not the point, but once you see it, it's all you see.)

I find that a good reminder that I shouldn't touch my eyes is when I accidentally touch my eyes. That makes me remember every time.