Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In United States patent law, patent misuse is a patent holder's use of a patent to restrain trade beyond enforcing the exclusive rights that a lawfully obtained patent provides. [1] If a court finds that a patent holder committed patent misuse, the court may rule that the patent holder has lost the right to enforce the patent.
Ink, Inc. v. Ill. Tool Works, Inc., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 10770 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 13, 2006) Holding; A product involved in a tying arrangement is not presumed to have market power for purposes of establishing an antitrust violation by the mere fact that it is patented. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded. Court membership; Chief ...
Ruled that an injunction should not automatically issue based on a finding of patent infringement. Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. - Supreme Court, 2006. Related to "tying" arrangements of patented products. KSR v. Teleflex - Supreme Court, 2007. Concerning the issue of obviousness as applied to patent claims. Microsoft v.
The Mercoid cases—Mercoid Corp. v. Mid-Continent Investment Co., 320 U.S. 661 (1944), and Mercoid Corp. v. Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co., 320 U.S. 680 (1944)—are 1944 patent tie-in misuse and antitrust decisions of the United States Supreme Court. These companion cases are said to have reached the "high-water mark of the patent misuse ...
Once a patent has expired, the benefits of the invention are to be enjoyed by the public and may not be extended by trademark. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corporation of America: 306 U.S. 618: 1939: Morton Salt Co. v. G.S. Suppiger Co. 314 U.S. 488: 1942: Patent misuse. United States v. Univis Lens Co. 316 U.S. 241: 1942
Morton Salt Co. v. G.S. Suppiger Co., 314 U.S. 488 (1942), is a patent misuse decision of the United States Supreme Court.It was the first case in which the Court expressly labeled as "misuse" the Motion Picture Patent / Carbice tie-in defense to a charge of patent infringement and created the present blanket remedy in infringement cases of unenforceability of the misused patent. [1]
The court recognized that this case was different on its facts from the Supreme Court's prior tie-in patent misuse cases such as Morton Salt Co. v. G.S. Suppiger Co., in which the Court held that a patentee "may not claim protection of his grant by the courts where it is being used to subvert" patent policy. [5]
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. is the caption of several United States Supreme Court patent–related decisions, the most significant of which is a 1969 patent–antitrust and patent–misuse decision concerning the levying of patent royalties on unpatented products.