Search

The article focuses on decision of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in in the case Impression Products v. Lexmark International, Inc. which applies patent exhaustion to both conditional sales and foreign sales. It mentions alternative framework which allows a narrow exception to the patent exhaustion to balance patent owners' rights and consumers' rights. It also mentions patentees' rights and consumer rights without unduly sacrificing the importance of free commerce.

The Supreme Court rejected the use of patent law to enforce conditional sales contracts in Impression Products v. Lexmark. The case appears to be just another step in the Supreme Court's ongoing campaign to reset the Federal Circuit's patent law jurisprudence. However, the decision casts a shadow on cases from all federal circuits that have enforced software licenses for more than 20 years and potentially imperils the business models on which software developers rely to create innovative products and to bring those products to market in a variety of useful ways. For over two decades, we could say that the license is the product-- software provides the functionality but the license provides what can be done with the software. Impression Products now raises a critical question for the software industry: is the license still the product? This Article answers that question by assessing the impact of the Impression Products case on software licensing. Fortunately, the case does not disrupt licenses used to develop products and leaves adequate room for innovative distribution licensing. Although the Supreme Court shut the door on enforcing end-user licenses using patent law, it left the door wide open for enforcing licenses using contract law. By linking the patent exhaustion and copyright first sale doctrines, the Supreme Court also seemed to shut the door on using copyright law to enforce end-user licenses. Although that linkage is accurate, the statutory scope of the copyright first sale doctrine differs from common law patent exhaustion, suggesting that end-user licenses still can be enforced using copyright law. To clarify this, however, Congress should amend the Copyright Act to explicitly recognize that end-user licenses are not copyright first sales. As Congress and the courts begin to address software licensing in the aftermath of Impression Products, one guiding principle seems clear--both software developers and users will be better served if the license is still the product. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patent exhaustion is a doctrine that excuses infringement where the patent holder has either authorized the sale of a patented item or licensed its use or sale. Absent an effective contractual restriction, the patent holder's rights in the patented item are exhausted and the patent holder cannot sue for infringement based on further use or resale of the item. This Article explores the question of whether patent exhaustion adheres in the patented device or if it is a defensive doctrine that only adheres to the benefit of particular parties. Traditionally courts have articulated the doctrine as liberating the accused product from patent rights, allowing it to pass through the stream of commerce to subsequent users with all rights exhausted. With respect to actual holdings, however, the Federal Circuit recently concluded that exhaustion has only excused infringement in the case law where the claim of infringement was against an "authorized acquirer" of the device, or against a party accused of inducing or contributing to the infringement of such an authorized acquirer. Apparently a third party can be liable for infringement by unwittingly taking action that facilitates the end user's use of the device for its intended purpose, even if the device is licensed to perform that function. This Article argues that the exhaustion doctrine should not be limited to shielding authorized acquirers of a patented device or any other particular classes of persons. The Supreme Court has never pronounced such a limitation on the doctrine. Rather, the Court has consistently characterized exhaustion as adhering in the patented device itself, allowing it to pass unimpeded through the stream of commerce to be used for its intended purpose. A conception of patent exhaustion as adhering in the patented device is supported by all of the policy theories that have been used to justify the doctrine. The exhaustion doctrine has traditionally been justified by (1) a policy to retain the balance between the need to encourage invention and the harm of a limited monopoly by ensuring that the inventor does not receive double recovery for the value of the patented invention and (2) the policy against restraints on alienation of servitudes. Recently scholars have argued that the patent exhaustion doctrine serves a third purpose: to guard the domain of the federal patent law, such that it does not interfere with the general commercial law of contracts. In fact, the Supreme Court has long embraced all three theories as supporting patent exhaustion. Moreover, all three theories support a concept of patent exhaustion as adhering in the patented device. If the purpose of the exhaustion doctrine is to police the domain of intellectual property statutes, such that they do not interfere with commercial law, then the ability of patent holders to police the use of downstream goods is properly limited by contract law rules such as privity of contract and unconscionability. Patent rights must be exhausted to avoid interference with those laws. If the exhaustion doctrine is justified by the related statutory domain policy against overcompensation for patent holders for the use of their patented inventions, then third parties should not be charged for interacting with patented devices for which the patent holders have already received market - based compensation. If the exhaustion doctrine is justified by the common law policy against restraints on alienation of chattels, then exhaustion adheres in the patented goods, such that they may move down the stream of commerce unimpeded with restrictions on their lawful and intended uses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Part 1 of this article discussed the historical development of the US exhaustion doctrine to the present. This Part 2 discusses a recent decision of the Federal Circuit that involves a complex licensing scheme with an unusual pattern that gives the scheme characteristics arguably bringing it into conflict with the exhaustion doctrine, on the one hand, but safely within the doctrine permitting the licensing of limited fields of use, on the other hand. The author suggests that the Federal Circuit's reasoning in reversing a grant of summary judgment against the scheme is not faithful to Supreme Court precedent, because it imposes an erroneous standing requirement on invoking the exhaustion doctrine and uses an unduly narrow standard to determine whether what is sold and what infringes the patent are sufficiently alike to trigger the exhaustion doctrine. Nonetheless, the court may have reached a correct result in the particular case: unresolved and unaddressed issues could be essential to determining the proper outcome, precluding summary judgment. In any event, for practical reasons, the Federal Circuit s new doctrine may greatly limit the future application of the exhaustion doctrine in several fields of new technology, particularly information technology. That may suggest a need to devise a new legal analysis to supplement the exhaustion doctrine. A form of equitable estoppel analysis, based on the underlying conceptions of the British Leyland case, is proposed to provide that supplement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case "Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons Inc." concerning copyright laws; reports laws that imposed a geographical limitation on the patent exhaustion doctrine; and mentions the U.S. copyright laws.

The article discusses whether this expansion of patent exhaustion is necessary or justified in the U.S. Topics discussed include development of the patent exhaustion doctrine under the common law; antitrust concept aimed to prevent patent misuse; application of the doctrine of patent misuse; and the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Bloomer v. McQuewan.

The article discusses the territorial scope of U.S. patent law in relation to the claim that American courts have yet to articulate a complete framework for applying the U.S. patent exhaustion doctrine (PED) to foreign sales as of January 2015. The nation's PED holds that the authorized first sale of a patented good terminates the patent holder's right to restrict the buyer's subsequent use and sale of that good. Several rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are examined.

The digital shift in distribution, from markets premised on disposing of physical artifacts to markets defined by data flows, is among the most important changes in the copyright landscape since the enactment of the 1976 Copyright Act. The disconnect between this new reality and our current statutory rules is particularly evident when it comes to the question of exhaustion. The first sale doctrine embodied within Section 109 was constructed around a mode of dispossession that is rapidly becoming obsolete. As a result, the benefits and functions it has long served in the copyright system are at risk. Building on our earlier work, this Article will argue that a meaningful exhaustion doctrine should survive the digital transition. After explaining the two primary hurdles to digital exhaustion under the existing statutory regime, we outline two possible approaches to legislating digital exhaustion, concluding that a flexible standards-based approach that vests considerable authority with the courts is the better solution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the potential impact that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the 2013 textbooks resale-related legal case Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons Inc. might have on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's stance on international patent exhaustion, sellers' rights, and America's first sale copyright law doctrine. Graduate student Supap Kirtsaeng of Thailand, the U.S. Copyright Act, and "gray market" activities involving goods such as textbooks are examined.

The article focuses on the U.S. court case HTC v. Nokia, which dealt with patent infringement, and provides a comparison of British and U.S. patent and copyright law. Topics include international patent exhaustion, the first sale doctrine, and the obviousness doctrine. Information is provided on copyright novelty and patent invalidity.

The article focuses on the U.S. court case Bowman v. Monsanto, which dealt with patent exhaustion under U.S. patent law. Topics include the use of patented seeds by farmers under U.S. patent law, the patenting of genetically modified strains of crops, and the U.S. Supreme Court's distinction between 'making' a patented article and patent exhaustion.

With the increasing dispersion of intellectual property comes the intellectual property rights owner's continued desire to retain that part of the equation for which the bargain was struck. In terms of patents, the patentee strikes a deal to disclose the invention to the public in exchange for a monopoly over its use for a limited term. Copyright holders contribute their works to the intellectual pool receiving value by sale, lease or license. In 2012-13, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with delineating the realms of two intellectual property exhaustion doctrines and answering the question of where to draw the line with regard to an IP owner's ability to control the protected invention or work via patent or copyright, respectively. In one case, the Court permitted the intellectual property owner to restrict a subsequent purchaser's use of the product subject to protection, while in the other case the Court rejected the intellectual property owner's attempt to control the downstream use or resale of the product. This article discusses the relevant intellectual property exhaustion doctrines, analyzes and reconciles the Court's decisions in these cases, and provides guidance for navigating restrictions on use of U.S. protected products and works around the globe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the 2013 case Bowman v. Monsanto Co. which deals with America's patent exhaustion doctrine, the right to sell a patented item, and the U.S. Patent Act of 1952. According to the article, the court determined that farmer Vernon Bowman was not allowed to reproduce self-replicating, genetically modified seeds without the defendant-patentee's permission. Precedent and patent infringement lawsuits are also examined.

The article focuses on the U.S. court cases Bowman v. Monsanto and Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, which dealt with the doctrine of exhaustion under the first sale doctrine. Topics include the limiting of rights for copyright owners, the U.S. Copyright Act, and the termination of patent rights upon sale.

The article focuses on patents acts in U.S. for protecting technological innovations of the country. It mentions that the biotechnology industry is a technology-dependent industry and relies heavily on patent law to secure protection for innovation and ensure returns adequate to sustain costly research and development programs. It reports that revised U.S. patent statute is the common law, also known as case or precedent law of the country. It informs that one common law doctrine that can exert powerful influence over patent rights and economic behavior is the doctrine of patent exhaustion. It further reviews several historic court judgments that have played an integral part in shaping current interpretation of the law.

The article presents an overview of the development of copyright law in Europe and North America and analyzes how the Internet has affected it. Topics mentioned include a comparison of the European theory of patent exhaustion with the American first sale doctrine, how other rights such as lending are exempt from the first sale doctrine, and philosophical justifications for allowing free access to copyrighted works.

The article presents information on the international doctrine of copyright exhaustion in the U.S. with reference to the decision of the Supreme Court of the U.S. on the case Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega, S.A. The concept of copyright exhaustion and the doctrine of first sale are discussed with reference to the market for parallel imports. Information on the legal interpretation of the doctrine of exhaustion is also presented.

The article presents the patent parallel importation in the U.S. and Germany. It states that the Quanta Computer Inc. versus LG Electronics Inc. case regarding the patent exhaustion is an example of the unauthorized importation of patented goods into the U.S. It also says the role of the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) in preventing the infringing product importations. Moreover, it adds the 24 of the Trademark Act (MArkenG) and of the Copyright Act (UrhG) of Germany.

The article focuses on the interaction of two legal doctrines, such as on-sale bar and patent exhaustion, regarding the sale of patented methods. It mentions the issue of the sale of patented invention in the cases In re Kollar and Quanta Computer Inc. v. LG Electronics Inc. It states several issues on method claims in the U.S. patent law such as tolerance for patenting and sale of method inventions. The bar from receiving patents and the differentiation between sale and license are discussed.

The Quanta judgement clarifies the US patent exhaustion doctrine on the basis of an authorized sale by the patent holder. It also contributes to the prism of patent-antitrust-contract laws to scrutinize contractual restrictions better on downstream purchasers. There are two main steps in the process of applying this prism. The first step is to determine the patent exhaustion issue. The second step is to evaluate such contractual restrictions through either the intersection of patent and antitrust laws or the intersection of contract and antitrust laws, or both intersections in some special cases. The correctness of determining both whether patent exhaustion is triggered and how antitrust law intervenes as a second filter plays a very important role in applying the Quanta-inspired prism. Through this prism, some Federal Circuit's decisions are re-visited, and the European Union perspective is analyzed in comparison with the US perspective. This article concludes that patent holders' contractual restrictions on downstream purchasers will be properly scrutinized under the prism of patent-antitrust-contract laws if promoting innovation and competition on the market as well as protecting customer welfare are respected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States Supreme Court has unanimously decided that the patent exhaustion doctrine does not extend to allow the re-planting of patented seeds. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses the Fujifilm Corp. v. Benun court case regarding patent exhaustion. It states that Benun contended that the sale of the single-use camera in foreign country and subsequently sold in the U.S. invokes the doctrine of exhaustion. However, the Federal Circuit argues that because of the sale in foreign country, the doctrine of exhaustion cannot be applied and selling of it in the U.S. constitute infringement.