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 7: | Line 7: | ||
-Bonito Boats filed action against Thunder Craft for violation of the Florida statute. | -Bonito Boats filed action against Thunder Craft for violation of the Florida statute. | ||
-Conclusion: dismissed due to confliction with federal patent law | -Conclusion: dismissed by Florida Court of Appeals and the Florida Supreme Court due to confliction with federal patent law via the Supremacy Clause; federal patent law rules higher than state law. | ||
'''Notes and Facts of the case''' | '''Notes and Facts of the case''' | ||
- | - | ||
Revision as of 01:51, 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 by Florida Court of Appeals and the Florida Supreme Court due to confliction with federal patent law via the Supremacy Clause; federal patent law rules higher than state law.
Notes and Facts of the case
-
