Indiana University Bloomington

Primary Navigation

Law Library

Sample horizontal photo

Services

Faculty Publications

Mark Janis

Mark Janis

View faculty profile »

Robert A. Lucas Chair of Law
  2. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN PLANTS (treatise) (with Dinges and Jervis) Oxford: Oxford University (forthcoming 2009-10).

  3. TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (student treatise) (with Dinwoodie and Austin) New York: Aspen Publishers (forthcoming 2009-10).

  4. ESSENTIALS OF TRADEMARK AND UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW (student text) (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie) New York: Aspen Publishers (forthcoming 2009).

  5. TRADE DRESS AND DESIGN LAW (casebook) (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie) New York: Aspen Publishers, 2009.
  6. International and Comparative Aspects of Trademark Dilution (with Peter K. Yu), 17 TRANSNATIONAL LAW & CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 603 (2008).

  7. Patent Pools, in ISSUES IN COMPETITION LAW AND POLICY VOL. ONE (Wayne Dale Collison, Ed.). Chicago: American Bar Association, 2008.

  8. TRADEMARK LAW AND THEORY: A HANDBOOK OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH (with Graeme B Dinwoodie, Eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2008.

  9. TRADEMARK & UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW IN A NUTSHELL (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie) Eagan, MN: West Publishing (forthcoming 2008).

  10. Confusion Over Use: Contextualism in Trademark Law (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie), 92 IOWA LAW REVIEW 1597 (2007) [HeinOnline]. Reprinted in 98 TRADEMARK REPORTER 1086 (2008).

  11. Lessons from the Trademark Use Debate (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie), 92 IOWA LAW REVIEW 1703 (2007). [HeinOnline]

  12. Rules v. Standards for Patent Law in the Plant Sciences, 24 LAW IN CONTEXT 54 (2006). Reprinted in AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION: SEEDS OF CHANGE (Jay P. Kesan, Ed.). Oxford: CABI, 2007.

  13. Technological Change and the Design of Plant Variety Protection Regimes, (with Stephen Smith) 82 CHICAGO-KENT LAW REVIEW 1557 (2007). To be reprinted, U.N. FAO Legal Office legal studies papers (2008).

  14. Unilateral Refusals to License (with Herbert Hovenkamp and Mark A. Lemley), 2 JOURNAL OF COMPETITION LAW & ECONOMY 1 (2006).
  15. “Minimal” Standards for Patent/Antitrust Under TRIPs, in INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC GOODS & TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY UNDER A GLOBALIZED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME (Keith Maskus and Jerome H. Reichman, Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2005.

  16. Unilateral Refusals to License in the US (with Herbert Hovenkamp and Mark A. Lemley), in ANTITRUST, PATENTS AND COPYRIGHT (Francois Leveque & Howard Shelanski, Eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2005.

  17. Use, Constructive Use, and Registration in the United States (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie), in TRADE MARK USE (Jeremy Phillips and Ilanah Simon, Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University, 2005.

  18. Balancing Ease and Accuracy in Assessing Pharmaceutical Exclusion Payments (with Herbert Hovenkamp and Mark A. Lemley), 88 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW 712 (2004).

  19. Commentary, Equilibrium in a Technology-Specific Patent System, 54 CASE WESTERN RESERVE LAW REVIEW 743 (2004).

  20. Reforming Patent Validity Litigation: The “Dubious Preponderance”, 19 BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL 923 (2004).

  21. Supplemental Forms of Intellectual Property Protection for Plants, 6 MINNESOTA JOURNAL OF LAW, SCIENCE, & TECHNOLOGY 305 (2004). Reprinted in 7 BIO-SCIENCE LAW REVIEW 32 (2005).

  22. TRADEMARKS & UNFAIR COMPETITION: LAW & POLICY (2004) (with Graeme B. Dinwoodie). New York: Aspen Publishers, 2004 (1st ed.), 2007 (2d. ed.).

  23. Anticompetitive Settlement of Intellectual Property Disputes (with Herbert Hovenkamp and Mark A. Lemley), 87 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW 1719 (2003). [HeinOnline]

  24. Intellectual Property Issues in Plant Breeding and Plant Biotechnology, in BIOTECHNOLOGY, GENE FLOW, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: AN AGRICULTURAL SUMMIT 5. Lafayette, IN: Purdue University (2002).

  25. Intellectual Property Protection for Plant Innovation: Unresolved Issues After J.E.M. v. Pioneer (with Jay P. Kesan), 20 NATURE/BIOTECHNOLOGY 1161 (2002).

  26. Patent Abolitionism, 17 BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL 899 (2002).

  27. Themes in Federal Circuit Patent Jurisprudence, 2000-2001, in Hugh Hansen (ed.), 7 INTERNATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW & POLICY (2002)

  28. Transitions in IP and Antitrust, 47 ANTITRUST BULLETIN 253 (2002).

  29. U.S. Plant Variety Protection: Sound and Fury. . .? (with Jay P. Kesan), 39 UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON LAW REVIEW 727 (2002).

  30. Designing an Optimal Intellectual Property System for Plants: A Supreme Court Debate (with Jay P. Kesan), 19 NATURE/BIOTECHNOLOGY 981 (October 2001).

  31. IP AND ANTITRUST LAW: AN ANALYSIS OF ANTITRUST PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW (with Herbert Hovenkamp and Mark A. Lemley). New York: Aspen Law & Business Publishers , 2001 (2d ed. forthcoming 2009).

  32. Patent Law in the Age of the Invisible Supreme Court, 2001 ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW 387 (2001). [HeinOnline]

  33. Sustainable Agriculture, Patent Rights, and Plant Innovation, 9 INDIANA JOURNAL OF GLOBAL LEGAL STUDIES 91 (2001).
  34. Inter Partes Reexamination, 10 FORDHAM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, MEDIA, AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL 481 (2000).

  35. On Courts Herding Cats: Contending with the Written Description Requirement, 2 WASHINGON UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF LAW & POLICY 55 (2000).

  36. Second Tier Patent Protection, 40 HARVARD INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL 151 (1999). Reprinted in 33 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REVIEW 17 (2001).

  37. A Tale of the Apocryphal Axe: Repair, Reconstruction, and the Implied License in Intellectual Property Law, 58 MARYLAND LAW REVIEW 423 (1999).

  38. Who’s Afraid of Functional Claims: Reforming the Federal Circuit’s §112, ¶6 Jurisprudence, 15 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER & HIGH TECHNOLOGY LAW REVIEW 231 (1999).

  39. Rethinking Reexamination: Towards a Viable Administrative Revocation System for U.S. Patent Law, 11 HARVARD JOURNAL OF LAW & TECHNOLOGY 1 (1997). Excerpted in FOUNDATIONS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (Robert P. Merges & Jane Ginsburg). New York: Foundation Press, 2004.

  40. Unmasking Structural Equivalency: The Intersection of §112, ¶6 Equivalents and the Doctrine of Equivalents, 4 ALBANY LAW JOURNAL OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 205 (1994).

  41. Judge & Jury Roles in Equivalents Analysis: Commentary on Malta v. Schulmerich Carillons, 74 JOURNAL OF PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE SOCIETY 621 (1992).