1/21/11 : Bonito Boats notes: Difference between revisions
From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Hamburgler (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Hamburgler (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
-Conclusion: dismissed due to confliction with federal patent law, therefore the Supremacy Clause rules federal patent law higher than state law. | -Conclusion: dismissed due to confliction with federal patent law, therefore the Supremacy Clause rules federal patent law higher than state law. | ||
'''Notes and Facts of the case''' | |||
-eg | |||
Revision as of 01:49, 21 January 2011
Case Summary
-Bonito Boats: No patent filed for the utilitarian or design aspects of the hull or manufacturing process (sprayed-fiberglass mold) by which the finished boats were produced.
-After 6 years of production, a Florida statute prohibited the use of a direct molding process to duplicate unpatented boat hulls, and the sale of them.
-Bonito Boats filed action against Thunder Craft for violation of the Florida statute.
-Conclusion: dismissed due to confliction with federal patent law, therefore the Supremacy Clause rules federal patent law higher than state law.
Notes and Facts of the case
-eg
