I find it rather ironic that at the same time I was speaking on the subject of 'Patent Trolls' at the Patent Strategies 2006 conference in New York, in Washington, DC, the Su-preme Court was deliberating this very topic in connection with eBay's appeal of an injunction granted to MercExchange by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
On 'Patent Trolls' and Injunctive Relief
I find it rather ironic that at the same time I was speaking on the subject of 'Patent Trolls' at the Patent Strategies 2006 conference in New York, in Washington, DC, the Supreme Court was deliberating this very topic in connection with eBay's appeal of an injunction granted to MercExchange by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 'The long-anticipated eBay case gets to the heart of the debate over so-called patent trolls ' companies that obtain patents only to license them, often using the threat of an injunction to extract a high price from infringers.' Woellert, L.: eBay Takes on the Patent Trolls. <i>Business Week</i>, March 30, 2006. One of the arguments that eBay made was that non-practicing inventors, quaintly nicknamed 'patent trolls,' should not be entitled to an injunction as a matter of course. This suggestion, however, seems to fly in the face of the Constitution, patent law, and common sense. Here are 10 reasons why injunctive relief should not be tied to practice of an invention.
By
Alexander PoltorakThis premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- 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 have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
