Quanta Brief - Kschlax: Difference between revisions
Created page with "Brief of Amicus Curiae Intellectual Property Owners Association In Support of the Respondents * I. THE PATENTEE'S ABILITY TO GRANT LIMITED LICENSES IS A RIGHT INHERENT IN THE PA..." |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* I. THE PATENTEE'S ABILITY TO GRANT LIMITED LICENSES IS A RIGHT INHERENT IN THE PATENT GRANT | * I. THE PATENTEE'S ABILITY TO GRANT LIMITED LICENSES IS A RIGHT INHERENT IN THE PATENT GRANT | ||
Restricted use licenses exist but must be stated. Freedom of use prevents a patent holder from collecting twice - once in the sale and again in the use of the product. Unless a pay-per-use agreement is reached, use is free and sale is costly, only. | |||
* II. CONDITIONAL LICENSING IS A COMMON PRACTICE IN MANY INDUSTRIES | * II. CONDITIONAL LICENSING IS A COMMON PRACTICE IN MANY INDUSTRIES | ||
Example: "home-use only" dvds are a conditional license. Thus restrictions on the use of patented material are common, and well-established. Applying this to patents is proper because: | |||
1. same patented product may have different value based on use | |||
2. multiple embodiments of a patent may have distinct values and applications | |||
3. separate claims may be profitable for different parties | |||
* III. PUBLIC POLICY FAVORS ENFORCING CONDITIONAL SALES OR LICENSES | * III. PUBLIC POLICY FAVORS ENFORCING CONDITIONAL SALES OR LICENSES | ||
Owner of property (physical) rights can condition its use by others. Intellectual property should be following the same conditions. Shifting the burden from license agreements to the patenting process; patentees would have to anticipate all uses of its product, and include them in the patent, or patents. | |||
* IV. CONDITIONAL LICENSES ARE SUBJECT TO PATENT EXHAUSTION WHEN PAIRED WITH AN ABUSE OF PATENT RIGHTS | * IV. CONDITIONAL LICENSES ARE SUBJECT TO PATENT EXHAUSTION WHEN PAIRED WITH AN ABUSE OF PATENT RIGHTS | ||
Conditional licenses cannot cover illegal practices, i.e. antitrust laws or geographic limitations | |||
Latest revision as of 15:36, 29 April 2011
Brief of Amicus Curiae Intellectual Property Owners Association In Support of the Respondents
- I. THE PATENTEE'S ABILITY TO GRANT LIMITED LICENSES IS A RIGHT INHERENT IN THE PATENT GRANT
Restricted use licenses exist but must be stated. Freedom of use prevents a patent holder from collecting twice - once in the sale and again in the use of the product. Unless a pay-per-use agreement is reached, use is free and sale is costly, only.
- II. CONDITIONAL LICENSING IS A COMMON PRACTICE IN MANY INDUSTRIES
Example: "home-use only" dvds are a conditional license. Thus restrictions on the use of patented material are common, and well-established. Applying this to patents is proper because:
1. same patented product may have different value based on use
2. multiple embodiments of a patent may have distinct values and applications
3. separate claims may be profitable for different parties
- III. PUBLIC POLICY FAVORS ENFORCING CONDITIONAL SALES OR LICENSES
Owner of property (physical) rights can condition its use by others. Intellectual property should be following the same conditions. Shifting the burden from license agreements to the patenting process; patentees would have to anticipate all uses of its product, and include them in the patent, or patents.
- IV. CONDITIONAL LICENSES ARE SUBJECT TO PATENT EXHAUSTION WHEN PAIRED WITH AN ABUSE OF PATENT RIGHTS
Conditional licenses cannot cover illegal practices, i.e. antitrust laws or geographic limitations
