"... the issue of induced infringement is significant to the business community, particularly technology companies that have faced lawsuits alleging that they are inducing patent infringement".The US Supreme Court hears arguments next week, on 23 February.
The PatLit weblog covers patent litigation law, practice and strategy, as well as other forms of patent dispute resolution. If you love -- or hate -- patent litigation, this is your blog. You can contact PatLit by emailing Michael here
Wednesday, 16 February 2011
Is proof of knowledge necessary in induced infringement claims?
Stephen Richer (Washington Legal Foundation) has emailed with an item for PatLit -- this analysis was published last Friday by Washington Legal Foundation. Titled "Supreme Court To Address Standard For Induced Patent Infringement – An examination of Global-Tech Appliances Inc. v. SEB, S.A." and written by Brian Pandya (Wiley Rein LLP), this not explains that the issue at stake is whether 35 U.S.C. sec. 271(b) carries a scienter requirement (i.e.that it must be necessary to prove that an alleged infringer has actual knowledge of the patent before he can be liable for inducing patent infringement. The note adds:
Etichette:
induced infringement,
scienter requirement,
United States
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment