Download Free A Comparative Study On Patent Infringement Remedy Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online A Comparative Study On Patent Infringement Remedy and write the review.

Nations throughout the world receive more patent applications, grant more patents, and entertain more patent infringement lawsuits than ever before. To understand the contemporary patent system, it is crucial to become familiar with how courts and other actors in different countries enable patent owners to enforce their rights. This is increasingly important, not only for firms that seek to market their products worldwide and for the lawyers who provide them with counsel, but also for scholars and policymakers working to develop better policies for promoting the innovation that drives long-term economic growth. Comparative Patent Remedies provides a critical and comparative analysis of patent enforcement in the United States and other major patent systems, including the European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia, China, South Korea, Taiwan, and India. Thomas Cotter shows how different countries respond to similar issues, and suggests how economic analysis can assist in adapting current practice to the needs of the modern world. Among the topics addressed are: how courts in various nations award monetary compensation for patent infringement, including lost profits, infringer's profits, and reasonable royalties; the conditions under which patent owners may obtain preliminary and permanent injunctions, including cross-border injunctions in the European Union; the availability of various options for potential defendants to challenge patent validity; and other matters, such as the availability of criminal enforcement and border measures to exclude infringing goods.
Through a collaboration among twenty legal scholars from North America, Europe and Asia, this book presents an international consensus on the use of patent remedies for complex products such as smartphones, computer networks, and the Internet of Things. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
In numerous jurisdictions, courts have realized that injunctive relief should not be available automatically in case of patent infringement. Particularly in the wake of the US Supreme Court decision in eBay v. MercExchange, it has become clear that granting an injunction may in some cases enable abuse by patent holders in order to obtain royalties exceeding significantly the value of patent-protected invention or that it may be manifestly against the public interest. This book offers a comparative study of the approaches towards injunctive relief taken by a number of leading jurisdictions, including the United States, the European Union (EU), selected EU Member States (Germany, France, The Netherlands, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Poland), and China, India, Japan and South Korea. Responding to the growing need to provide a comprehensive and flexible framework for the application of injunctive relief, twelve patent law experts, both academics and well-known practitioners familiar with practice in their particular jurisdictions, offer analyses of such elements of patent law injunctions as the following: • access to standard-essential patents; • operations of patent assertion entities; • trolls and patent privateers; • equitable nature of injunctive relief as a source of flexibility; • abuse of right and competition law defences to injunctive relief as sources of flexibility; • analysis of EU instruments that could be used in the interpretation of Member State implementing laws; • conditions for the application of tools such as equity, competition law or general doctrines such as abuse of rights; • circumstances when injunctions should be denied to patentees even though a valid patent was infringed; • complex products cases where patents protect minor parts of the technologies; and • deficiencies and advantages of various approaches to injunctive relief. A proposal for an optimal model of granting injunctions is also included. Given that there is a growing consensus as to the circumstances when injunctions should be available to the patentees and the circumstances when injunctions should be denied, a comprehensive analysis of the various legal doctrines that justify a more flexible approach towards injunctive relief is warranted. This book will give patent law practitioners and in-house counsel the opportunity to draw from the experience of other jurisdictions where courts faced similar problems. Policymakers, patent office officials, academics and researchers in intellectual property law will also welcome this approach.
Over the past two decades, a small but growing number of law-and-economics scholars have begun to apply the standard tools of economic analysis to a field that long had evaded scrutiny by the law-and-economics community, namely the field of comparative law. To date, however, comparative law and economics scholars have devoted relatively little attention to the law of intellectual property - a gap that is in some ways surprising, given the professedly instrumental character of (much of) intellectual property law and policy. This essay, which will appear as a chapter in a forthcoming edited volume titled Global Perspectives on Patent Law (Ruth Okediji & Margo Bagley eds., Oxford Univ. Press), presents a modest effort at remedying this state of affairs, by presenting a proposed research agenda for a comparative law and economics analysis of one specific set of issues within the law of intellectual property: the law of patent remedies. Part I lays out a proposed protocol for the use of economic analysis to better understand, evaluate, and critique the law of patent remedies as it exists both in the United States and abroad. Part II focuses on the two principal remedies for patent infringement, permanent injunctions and monetary damages. In particular, Part II outlines the similarities and differences among various nations' approaches to injunctions and damages for patent infringement; suggests some possible explanations for, and consequences of, the perceived differences; and proposes some areas which I plan to explore in greater depth in connection with my own pending book project on the topic.
Succinct and timely, Patent Law, Sixth Edition demystifies its subject as it explores and explains important cases, judicial authorities, statutes, and policy. Approachably written for law students, attorneys, inventors, and laypersons alike, this text stands on its own and may be used alongside any patent or IP casebook to support more in-depth study of patent law. New to the Sixth Edition: Coverage of the Supreme Court’s ongoing, intensive scrutiny of the America Invents Act (AIA), the most significant change to U.S. patent law in 70 years, including: Helsinn (definition of prior art under the AIA) Cuozzo (non-reviewability of institution decisions) Oil States (Constitutionality of AIA) SAS Institute (rejecting partial institution) Return Mail (federal government not a “person” entitled to post-grant review) Dex Media (cert. granted, reviewability of Board’s time-bar decisions) The burgeoning landscape of patent-eligibility jurisprudence under 35 U.S.C. §101, including Federal Circuit decisions in: Vanda, Cleveland Clinic, Genetic Techs., Endo, Athena Diagnostics (laws of nature) Enfish; Thales Visionix (abstract ideas) Berkheimer, Aatrix, Cellspin (role of fact questions in the Mayo/Alice Step Two “inventiveness” inquiry) Disparate viewpoints for analyzing the bedrock requirement of nonobviousness, including the Federal Circuit’s first en banc obviousness decision in thirty years: Apple v. Samsung The continued vitality of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, as illustrated in a spate of Federal Circuit decisions including: Lilly v. Hospira Supreme Court decisions examining patent infringement remedies, including: WesternGeco (offshore lost profits) NantKwest (cert. granted, attorney fee-shifting in §145 civil actions) Supreme Court decisions cabining long-standing defenses to patent infringement, including: Impression Products (patent exhaustion) SCA Hygiene (laches and equitable estoppel) Professors and students will benefit from: Thorough coverage and clear writing that clarifies principal legal doctrines, key judicial authorities, governing statutes, and policy considerations for obtaining, enforcing, and challenging a U.S. patent In-depth treatment and comparison of pre- and post-America Invents Act regimes for novelty and prior art with numerous hypotheticals Timely statistics on patent trends Succinct analysis of multi-national patent protection regimes Helpful visual aids, such as figures, tables, and timelines A sample patent and breakdown of a prosecution history Boldfaced key terms and a convenient Glossary
Based on the dichotomy of the property rule and the liability rule for property rights protection in perspective of Law and Economics, this article proposes that the normative standard of remedies for patent infringement should be in between the two extremes, which might be called “relative property rule”. The original level of specific patent remedy rules, such as lost profits, illicit profits, royalty, etc., in short of legislative or judicial adjustments is much likely to deviate from the normative standard. The U.S. courts grant injunctions according to principles of equity and adjust the damages award actively in order to make the patent remedial level in line with the relative property rule. In comparison, the patent remedial level of China does not conform to the relative property rule in some aspects. The main body of this article is a comparison of remedy rules between the U.S. and China, and will demonstrate that the lost profits damages in China are obviously lower than that of the U.S., but contrary to popular impression, injunctive remedy in China is in a higher level.