Patent misuse in the United States, is an affirmative defense used in patent litigation after the defendant has been found infringed a patent. This umbrella term usually describes: The United States of America — also referred to as the United States, the U.S.A., the U.S., America, the States, or (archaically) Columbia—is a federal republic of 50 states located primarily in central North America (with the exception of two states: Alaska and Hawaii). ... An affirmative defense is a defense used in litigation between private parties in common law jurisdictions. ... In Common law, a defendant is any person who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff in a civil suit or any person who has been named in a criminal information or criminal complaint and stands accused of violating a criminal statute. ... In law, a patent infringement occurs when the subject-matter claimed in a patent has been utilized by someone other than the rightholder, without the owners approval or in disagreement with the terms of use given by the owner. ... A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a government to an inventor or applicant for a limited amount of time (normally maximum 20 years from the filing date, depending on extension). ...
improper expansion of the scope or term of the patent
In the United States, patent is a statutory right that grants the patentee the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling a patented invention. Antitrust is also the name for a movie, see Antitrust (movie) Antitrust or competition laws legislate against trade practices that undermine competitiveness or are considered to be unfair. ...
Patentmisuse is an affirmative defense that recognizes that it is possible for a patent owner to abuse the exclusive right enjoyed as a result of the issuance of a patent.
Patentmisuse merely prevents the owner of the patent from recovering for infringement for the duration of the misuse.
Patentmisuse arose as an equitable defense available to the accused infringer, from the desire to restrain practices that did not in themselves violate any law, but that drew anticompetitive strength from the patent right, and thus were deemed to be contrary to public policy.
In general, misuse exists when the patentee has either engaged in conduct involving the patent that amounts to a violation of the antitrust laws or has improperly sought to expand the scope of the patent (either in a physical or temporal sense).
The court stated that while there was nothing inherently wrong with purchasing a patent and enforcing it against an infringer, the intent and underlying purpose of accumulating such a large number of patents amounted to a violation of antitrust laws and patentmisuse.
It was made clear that a patentee is not guilty of patentmisuse or illegally extending the patent right by seeking to obtain relief for conduct by a third party that would otherwise be deemed "contributory infringement" (i.e., the sale of a component uniquely suited to be used in infringing a patent).
Feeds |
Contact