[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Patent fallacies
There seems to be some misunderstanding of how patent protection works. Page
numbers in square brackets are references to _Patent_It_Yourself_ by David
Pressman (Nolo Press) 2nd edition. Page numbers in angle brackets are to
``Intellectual Property'' by Miller & Davis (West) 2nd edition.
CONTRIBUTOR INFRINGEMENT
``If your claims don't read on the infringnid device, but the infringing
device is a specially made compenent tha't nly useful in a machine covered
by your patent, the ingringer may be liable under the doctrine of
`Contributroy infringment' '' [page 15-9]
``If a person actively encourages another to make, user or sell the inventino
without permission, the psers so inducing is liable for INDIRECT
infringment. CONTRIBUTORY infringment can be commmitted by know selling
or supplying a non-stape item for which the only or predominant use is in
connecitno with a patented invention.'' <130>
``Contributory infringement can occur only in connection with a SALE . . .
Thus, a contributory infringer can be liable for infringment even though
what he has sold is completey i the public domain and has no patent
protection itself.'' <131>
HOME INFRINGEMENT
``While 'home infrignement' may be difficult to detect, nevertheless it is
a form in infringment which is legally actionable and can subject the
infringer to paying damages and/or an injunction prohibiting futher
infringement '' [page 15-12]
''A patenet ahs the EXCLUSIVE right to MAKE, USE or SELL the invention.
35 SUCA Par 154 <128> .... The owner of a patent ... has the right to
exclude all others from using ... it.
SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT IS OK
``. . . a patent owner is not prejudiced by the fact that antoher
infringer has prodcuded the item without notice of the paten even
though a later second infrigner could legitimately claim that he
copies an unmarked product.'' <129>
/w