Professor Dinwoodie is perhaps best known for his work in international intellectual property law and has written on all aspects of that field. In a series of articles and books over three decades, he has addressed the means by which international intellectual property law norms do and should develop. In particular, he has highlighted the range of institutions that create transnational law, arguing for greater attention to the role of national institutions and private ordering. (See e.g., A New Copyright Order: Why National Courts Should Create Global Norms,149 U. Pa. L. Rev. 469 (2000); Private Ordering and the Creation of International Copyright Norms: The Role of Public Structuring, 160 Journal of Inst. & Theor. Econ. 161-180 (2004)).

As a result of his scholarship on these questions of private international law (including his innovative advocacy of the substantive law method in transnational copyright litigation), Professor Dinwoodie has been intimately involved in the scholarly and policy debates that have taken place internationally about transnational IP litigation, organizing and editing the 2001 symposium showcasing the draft treaty on that topic proposed by Professors Dreyfuss and Ginsburg, and serving as an Adviser to the American Law Institute Project on that topic, which resulted in a set of Principles approved in 2007. He was also one of the 12 scholars who published the European counterpart to the ALI project, the so-called CLIP Principles, in 2012, and before that served as a consultant to the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) on matters of private international law, producing an often-cited report on trademark aspects of the question. This policy based-work was accompanied by a number of scholarly pieces, including Developing a Private International Intellectual Property Law: The Demise of Territoriality?, 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 711 (2009), described by a leading IP judge as an illuminating magnum opus.

Professor Dinwoodie has also been a leading figure in the critical treatment of the public international law of intellectual property, outlining the complex architecture of the system and analyzing a range of developments in a number of scholarly articles and a foundational casebook (written with Bill Hennessey and Shira Perlmutter). Several of those articles were written with Rochelle Dreyfuss, a collaboration that led in 2012 to the publication of A Neofederalist Vision of TRIPS (Oxford University Press 2012), described by other prominent scholars as “the crowning achievement of more than a decade of incisive scholarly analysis by two leading scholars of intellectual property law and policy” and “a uniquely insightful and illuminating book on the meaning of the TRIPS Agreement.” As Professor Jerry Reichman commented on its publication, “their Neo-Federalist approach could become the key to the long-term stability and success of [the TRIPS Agreement]. It should be required reading for everyone working in this field, especially for judges sitting on WTO dispute-settlement panels and the Appellate Body.” Most recently, Professor Dinwoodie has again collaborated with Professor Dreyfuss on analysis of the significance of Brexit in light of the international IP system.

Professor Dinwoodie has made vital contributions to scholarly and policy debates about domestic IP regimes on both sides of the Atlantic, and these have often had a comparative flavor. His 1996 book-length article, Federalized Functionalism, was one of the earliest critical and comprehensive treatments of the newly enacted EU design protection regime and was published almost simultaneously with two substantial and well-received articles on U.S. trade dress law. (Reconceptualizing the Inherent Distinctiveness of Product Design Trade Dress, 75 N.C. L. Rev. 471 (1997) and The Death of Ontology: A Teleological Approach to Trademark Law, 84 Iowa L. Rev. 611 (1999)). The latter article, described by Annette Kur as a “seminal article advocating a teleological approach to trade mark law,” has influenced scholarship on both sides of the Atlantic. Professor Dinwoodie has continued to be a prominent voice on design law matters, writing the first U.S. casebook on design law (with Mark Janis) in 2010 and more recently contributing (with Lionel Bently) to public debates about design reform in the UK.

On trademark law, in addition to his work above on distinctiveness and functionality of design marks, Professor Dinwoodie is best known in the United States for his articulation of the distinction between a “proactive” and a “reactive” approach to the development of trademark law, first highlighted in his article Trademarks and Territory: Detaching Trademark Law from the Nation State, 41 Hous. L. Rev. 885 (2004), and later in his 2004 Helen Wilson Nies Lecture The Trademark Jurisprudence of the Rehnquist Court and in his 2008 Herchel Smith International Intellectual Property Lecture Ensuring Consumers “Get What They Want” and The Role of Trademark Law at the University of Cambridge. He returned to similar themes in light of recent developments in the Third Annual E.W. Barker Distinguished Visitor in Intellectual Property Lecture on Trademark Law as a Normative Project at the National University of Singapore in 2022. Trademarks and Territory also illuminated what he called the different “intrinsic” and “political” conceptions of territoriality embedded in trademark law. He developed the importance of these conceptions of territoriality in the EU context (Territorial Overlaps in Trademark Law: The Evolving European Model, 92 N.D. L. Rev. 1669 (2017)) and, in a book to be published by Oxford University Press in 2026, in the broader international system as a whole. That book, International Trademark Protection: Territoriality in a Post-National Age, also highlights the importance of non-national norms in trademark law, a theme Professor Dinwoodie first explored with Larry Helfer in their article Designing Non-National Systems: The Case of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, 43 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 14 (2001). The book will also draw on the distinction between “proactive” and “reactive” lawmaking and the distinct role of trademark registration schemes first noted in Trademarks and Territory; and he will further develop the proactive/reactive distinction in a forthcoming book, Trade Mark Values, to be published by Cambridge University Press in 2027.

Professor Dinwoodie’s scholarship (with Mark Janis) on the trademark use doctrine (see, e.g, Confusion Over Use: Contextualism in Trademark Law, 92 Iowa L. Rev. 1597 (2007)) not only won the Ladas Award for the Best Article on Trade Mark Law in 2007 but helped frame (along with work by Stacey Dogan & Mark Lemley) an important debate that arguably still rumbles in contemporary trademark law. That work has been cited extensively including by the US Supreme Court, as the same issue has been fought out, especially in the context of keyword advertising, on a worldwide basis. That scholarship argued against a threshold trademark use requirement for trademark infringement. Instead, Professor Dinwoodie argued for the development of greater affirmative defenses in trademark law in his 2008 Lewis & Clark College of Law Distinguished IP Lecture, Developing Defenses in Trademark Law (13 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. (2009)).

After taking up the Oxford Chair, Professor Dinwoodie intensified his exploration of similar issues in European trademark law, publishing important scholarship on the Europeanisation of trademark law, submerged notions of unfair competition in European trademark law, and (with Dev Gangjee) critical analysis of the construction of the consumer in EU trademark law. This last work highlighted the different normative and empirical dimensions to the fiction of the average consumer, thus paralleling the distinction between proactive and reactive lawmaking first developed by Professor Dinwoodie in the U.S. context. This essentially transatlantic character is found in much of Professor Dinwoodie’s scholarship, which always draws heavily on comparative analysis. His book, Secondary Liability of Internet Service Providers, 25 Global Studies in Comparative Law (Springer 2017), is an edited collection growing out of his role as a General Reporter at the Annual Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law in Vienna, and includes his own chapter, A Comparative Analysis of the Secondary Liability of Online Service Providers.

The international and comparative dimension is also present in Professor Dinwoodie’s work on copyright law. In addition to his articulation of a radical approach to choice of law in transnational copyright litigation in A New Copyright Order: Why National Courts Should Create Global Norms,149 U. Pa. L. Rev. 469 (2000), Professor Dinwoodie has authored important critiques of WTO decisions on copyright law (Incorporating International Norms in the Development of Contemporary Copyright Law, 62 Ohio St. L.J. 733 (2001)) and new international copyright lawmaking dynamics that too closely resemble domestic processes (The WIPO Copyright Treaties: A Transition to the Future of International Copyright Lawmaking? 57 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 751 (2007)). He has argued for a more expansive scope of copyright lawmaking under the Treaty Clause than commonly accepted (Copyright Lawmaking Authority: An (Inter)nationalist Perspective on The Treaty Clause, 30 Colum. J.L. & Arts (2007)). That international and comparative dimension is also a feature of his important collaboration with Jerry Reichman and Pam Samuelson in A Reverse Notice and Takedown Regime To Enable Fair Uses of Technically Protected Copyrighted Works, 22 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 981 (2007).

Ensuring Consumers “Get What They Want” and The Role of Trademark Law, 83 Camb. L.J. 36- 61 (2024)

International Copyright: The Introduction in International Copyright Law and Practice 1- 170 (Bently, Geller & Nimmer eds. Lexis Nexis 2023)

Trademark Law as a Normative Project, 2023 Sing. J. Leg. S. 305-341 (2023)

Reading Trademark Tea-Leaves at the Supreme Court, 23 Chi.-Kent J. Intell. Prop. 99-115 (2023)

Universalism in International Copyright Law as Seen Through the Lens of Marrakesh, in Intellectual Property Ordering Beyond Borders (Khan and Metzger eds, Cambridge Univ. Press 2022)

Injunctive Relief in Patent Law Under TRIPS, in Injunctions and Patent Law (Husovec and Contreras eds., Cambridge Univ. Press 2022) (with Dreyfuss)

The Function of Trademarks in The United States in The Cambridge Handbook on International and Comparative Trademark Law 178-192 (Ginsburg & Calboli eds. Cambridge Univ. Press 2021)

Who Are Internet Intermediaries? in The Oxford Handbook of Online Intermediary Liability 37-56 (Frosio ed. Oxford Univ. Press 2021)

Non-Conventional Marks and the Obstacle of Functionality: WIPO’s Role in Fleshing Out the Telle Quelle Rule, in Research Handbook on the World Intellectual Property Organization (Ricketson ed. Edward Elgar Press 2020) (with Kur)

Pluralism and Universalism in International Copyright Law: The Role of an International Acquis in Universalism or Pluralism in International Copyright Law (Synodinou ed., Kluwer Law International 2019)

Brexit and IP: The Great Unraveling?, 39 Cardozo Law Review 967 (2018) (with R. Dreyfuss).

Territorial Overlaps in Trademark Law: The Evolving European Model, 92 Notre Dame Law Review 1669 (2017).

A Comparative Analysis of the Secondary Liability of Online Service Providers in Secondary Liability of Internet Service Providers 1-72 (Dinwoodie ed. Springer 2017)

The Image of the Consumer in European Trade Mark Law, in The Image(s) of the Consumer in EU Law 339-379 (Leczykiewicz and Weatherill eds. Hart Publishing 2015) (with Gangjee)

Secondary Liability for Online Trademark Infringement: The International Landscape, 36 Columbia J. L. & Arts 463-501 (2014)

Dilution as Unfair Competition: European Echoes in Intellectual Property at the Edge: The Contested Contours of IP 81-102(Dreyfuss and Ginsburg eds., Cambridge University Press 2014)

An International Acquis: Integrating Regimes and Restoring Balance in International Intellectual Property: A Handbook of Contemporary Research 121-164 (Gervais ed. Edward Elgar Press 2014) (with Dreyfuss)

Intellectual Property in English Private Law (Andrew Burrows ed. 3d ed) (Oxford University Press 2013) (with Cornish)

The Europeanisation of Trade Mark Law, in The Europeanisation of Intellectual Property Law 75-100 (Ohly and Pila eds. Oxford Univ. Press 2013)

European Max Planck Group on Conflict of Laws, Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property: The CLIP Principles and Commentary (Oxford University Press 2013) (with CLIP group)

The Common Law and Trade Marks in an Age of Statutes, in The Common Law of Intellectual Property: Essays in Honour of Professor David Vaver 331-352 (2010) (Bently, Ng & D’Agostino eds.)

The Law Applicable to Secondary Liability In Intellectual Property Cases, 42 N.Y.U. J. Intl. L. & Pol. 201-235 (2010) (with Dreyfuss and Kur)

Enhancing Global Innovation Policy: The Role of WIPO and its Conventions in Interpreting the TRIPS Agreement, in Research Handbook on Intellectual Property and Trade (Correa ed. 2010) (with Dreyfuss)

Designing a Global Intellectual Property System Responsive to Change: the WTO, WIPO and Beyond, 46 Hous. L. Rev. 1187-1234 (2009) (with Dreyfuss)

A Reverse Notice and Takedown Regime To Enable Fair Uses of Technically Protected Copyrighted Works, 22 Berk. Tech. L.J. 981-1060 (2007) (with Reichman and Samuelson), reprinted in Peer to Peer File Sharing and Secondary Liability (Strowel ed. 2009)

The WIPO Copyright Treaties: A Transition to the Future of International Copyright Lawmaking? 57 Case Western Law Review 751-766 (2007)

Copyright Lawmaking Authority: An (Inter)nationalist Perspective on The Treaty Clause, 30 Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts 355-395 (2007) (symposium issue)

Lessons From the Trademark Use Debate, 92 Iowa Law Review 1703-1721 (2007) (with Janis)

Confusion Over Use: Contextualism in Trademark Law, 92 Iowa Law Review 1597-1667 (2007) (with Janis), reprinted in 98 Trademark Reporter 1086 (2008)

The International Intellectual Property System: Treaties, Norms, National Courts and Private Ordering in Intellectual Property, Trade and Development: Normative and Institutional Aspects 61-114 (Gervais ed. 2007) (Oxford Univ. Press)

Patenting Science: Protecting the Domain of Accessible Knowledge, in The Future of The Public Domain 191-221 (Guibault and Hugenholtz eds. 2006) (with Dreyfuss)

The Story of Kellogg v. National Biscuit Company: Breakfast with Brandeis, in Intellectual Property Stories 220-257 (Dreyfuss and Ginsburg eds. 2005)

WTO Dispute Resolution and The Preservation of The Public Domain of Science Under International Law, in International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology Under a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime 861-883 (Maskus and Reichman eds. 2005) (Cambridge Univ. Press) (with Dreyfuss)

TRIPS and the Dynamics of Intellectual Property Lawmaking, 36 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 95-122 (2004) (with Dreyfuss) (symposium issue)

Trademarks and Territory: Detaching Trademark Law From the Nation-State, 41 Houston Law Review 885-973 (2004) (symposium issue)

International Intellectual Property Law and the Public Domain of Science, 7 Journal of International Economic Law 431-448 (2004) (with Dreyfuss)

Private Ordering and the Creation of International Copyright Norms: The Role of Public Structuring, 160 Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 161-180 (2004) (symposium issue)

The Architecture of the International Intellectual Property System, 77 Chicago-Kent Law Review 993-1014 (2002) (symposium issue)

Incorporating International Norms in the Development of Contemporary Copyright Law, 62 Ohio State Law Journal 733-782 (2001) (symposium issue), reprinted in The Globalization of International Law 733 (Berman ed.2006)

International Intellectual Property Litigation: A Vehicle for Resurgent Comparativist Thought?, 49 American Journal of Comparative Law 429-453 (2001) (symposium issue)

Private International Aspects of the Protection of Trademarks (Jan. 2001) (study commissioned by the World Intellectual Property Organization), WIPO Doc. No. WIPO/PIL/01/4

Federalized Functionalism: The Future of Design Protection in the European Union, 24 American Intellectual Property Law Association Quarterly Journal 611-723 (1996) (symposium issue)

Secondary Liability for Online Trademark Infringement: The International Landscape, 36 Columbia J. L. & Arts 463(2014).

Developing a Private International Intellectual Property Law: The Demise of Territoriality?, 51 William and Mary Law Review 711 (2009).

Lewis & Clark College of Law Ninth Distinguished IP Lecture: Developing Defenses in Trademark Law, 13 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 99 (2009).

Confusion Over Use: Contextualism in Trademark Law, 92 Iowa Law Review 1597 (2007) (with Janis).

Trademarks and Territory: Detaching Trademark Law From the Nation-State, 41 Houston Law Review 885 (2004).

Designing Non-National Systems: The Case of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, 43 William & Mary Law Review 141 (2001) (with Helfer).

A New Copyright Order: Why National Courts Should Create Global Norms,149 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 469 (2000).

The Death of Ontology: A Teleological Approach to Trademark Law, 84 Iowa Law Review 611 (1999).

Reconceptualizing the Inherent Distinctiveness of Product Design Trade Dress, 75 North Carolina Law Review 471 (1997).

Trade Dress and Design Law (2d ed.) (with Janis and DuMont) (Aspen Law Publishing) (2024)

Trademarks and Unfair Competition: Law and Policy (Aspen Publishers Inc. 6th ed. 2022) (with M. Janis).

Secondary Liability of Internet Service Providers (G. Dinwoodie ed., Springer, 2017).

A Neofederalist Vision of TRIPS: The Resilience of The International Intellectual Property Regime (Oxford University Press) (2012) (with R. Dreyfuss).

International Intellectual Property Law and Policy (with Perlmutter, Hennessey and Austin) (LexisNexis Publishing) (2d ed. 2008).

Prior to teaching, Professor Dinwoodie had been an associate with Sullivan and Cromwell in New York, concentrating in the practice of intellectual property law and in commercial, corporate, and international litigation. Professor Dinwoodie holds an LL.B. degree in Private Law (First Class Honors) from the University of Glasgow, an LL.M. from Harvard Law School, and a J.S.D. from Columbia Law School. He was the Burton Fellow in residence at Columbia Law School for 1988-89, working in the field of intellectual property law, and a John F. Kennedy Scholar at Harvard Law School for 1987–88.

Chicago Kent College, of Law

Program in Intellectual Property Law; Center for Design, Law & Technology