I hope not, but that is one risk created by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Ebay case and by the actions of some courts who have denied permanent injunctions in successful infringement cases. But the fact that a permanent injunction does not issue after a judgment of infringement does not mean that the infringer (by losing the case) obtains a right to use the patent owner’s property in the future.  It simply means that the court declined to add the coercive force of an injunction to the statutory right to exclude as to future infringing conduct.

           

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Many industries function under technological standards that shape the technology, the products, and the focus of competition. But standards-setting groups have become competition focuses themselves, such as in the debate about “open document” versus “open xml” as a standard. 

 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

We wake up one morning and discover that a question we have been asking for the last decade or two may now be the wrong one. The question was: how can we use law to enable businesses to use e-commerce? The question now seems to be: how can we shape law to support e-commerce without over-regulating it?

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Reverse engineering is not an inviolate right

      Actually, contracts control. I can have a privilege to do something, but then can waive that privilege. So too the privilege to make limited copies for purposes of some forms of reverse engineering.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks