Exclusive rights of patent owners versus rights of chattel owners: the implied licence approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Everybody who owns a smartphone is the chattel owner of an artefact embodying patented inventions. The extent to which one may use the smartphone depends on the scope of patent rights and the implied licences granted by the patent owners. Little attention has been given to this in New Zealand. This article seeks to address this gap by exploring patentees’ exclusive rights and implied licences and how these play out domestically and internationally. It examines the convoluted case law that traverses the interface between patent exclusive rights and chattel owner rights. The article focuses on New Zealand, but borrows case law from the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada to fill gaps. It surmises that the current law in New Zealand is complicated and fact-dependent, and relatively pro-patentee as opposed to pro-chattel owner. The article concludes by analysing whether an exhaustion model would be simpler and more balanced than the implied licence approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".