News & Analysis as of

Patent Royalties Supreme Court of the United States

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2021

Knobbe Martens on

Copying From a Copyrighted Computer Program May Be Fair Use to the Extent Needed to Promote Adoption of the Use of Accrued Talents in Creating a New Software Platform - In Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., Appeal No....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Special Report - 2020 IP Law Year in Review: Copyrights

Copyright jurisprudence in 2020 was, in many ways, a study in the scope of copyright protection. While certain courts brought century-year-old precedent to the forefront to interpret the scope of copyrights, other courts...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - November 2020 #4

SIPCO, LLC v. Emerson Electric Co., Appeal No. 2018-1635 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 17, 2020) - Our Case of the Week is one of two cases we revisit following further precedential decisions issued by the Federal Circuit this week (see...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Wild, Wild WesternGeco: Reasonable Royalties and Lost Profits

Following remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the impact of an intervening invalidation of four of six patent claims in issue by the Patent Trial and...more

Knobbe Martens

Westerngeco L.L.C. v. Ion Geophysical Corp. [Opinion On Remand]

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Wallach, and Hughes. On remand from the Supreme Court. Summary: Even though the issue of the jury’s award of lost profits was still pending, a party could not reopen the issue of...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Summer 2018

Fenwick & West LLP on

In This Issue - US Taxation of IP After Tax Reform - U.S. taxation of intellectual property has become astoundingly more complex after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new rules are so complex that the IRS and Treasury...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | April 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more

McAfee & Taft

Regular audits of technology license agreements may reduce your patent royalty payments

McAfee & Taft on

Patent license royalty payments can be habit-forming. Some patent licenses have terms extending for potentially two decades or longer. As a result, patent licenses are frequently filed away never to be seen again....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Stories of 2015: #11 to #15

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its ninth annual list of top patent stories. For 2015, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more

Fenwick & West LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Post-Patent Expiration Royalties

Fenwick & West LLP on

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that “a patentee’s use of a royalty agreement that projects beyond the expiration date of the patent is unlawful per se.” 379 U.S. 29, 32 (1964). On June...more

Baker Donelson

What Happens if You Wait Too Long to File Your Patent Case?

Baker Donelson on

Patent owners recently were reminded that delay in pursuing patent infringers can be fatal. A patent lawsuit that is not filed timely can be blocked by the doctrine of laches, even to the extent of preventing the patent owner...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

En Banc Federal Circuit Preserves The Patent Laches Defense Over Dissent

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a divided en banc decision in SCA Hygiene Products v. First Quality Baby Products, the Federal Circuit preserved the defense of laches for patent cases even though the Supreme Court eliminated that defense in copyright...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Maintains Licensing Status Quo in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC

A bedrock principle of U.S. patent law is that the patent grant comprises a quid pro quo. In exchange for a limited term of exclusivity (presently, twenty years from the earliest filing date), the patented invention is placed...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

A Royalty By Any Other Name: Post-Expiration Payments After Kimble v. Marvel

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Patent holders and accused infringers will need to continue being creative in drafting license agreements after the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kimble v. Marvel, No. 13-720, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4067, at *6 (June 22,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC (2015)

In the 1977 Yale Law School Holiday Pageant there was a skit about the Supreme Court, with a song sung to the tune of Cole Porter's "Another Opening, Another Show" from the musical Kiss Me Kate... ...That parody...more

BakerHostetler

Kimble v. Marvel Changes How Patent Licenses Should Be Drafted and Also Diligenced in Transactions

BakerHostetler on

In 1990, Stephen Kimble obtained a patent for a toy that allowed children and adults to shoot “webs” from the palms of their hands. Kimble met with the president of Marvel Enterprises, Marvel Entertainment’s predecessor, to...more

BakerHostetler

Patent Defeats Antitrust in Latest Test at Supreme Court

BakerHostetler on

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, 576 U.S. ____ (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether to overturn Brulotte v. Thys, 379 U.S. 29 (1964), its 1964 decision holding that it was per se unlawful for a patent owner to...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Check Your Technology License: Payments May Be Unenforceable

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Expiration of a patent also terminates the rights to collect royalties on that patent – even if a license contract says otherwise. All businesses are reminded to check the termination date of any patent licensed to the...more

BakerHostetler

The Supreme Court Again Rejects Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

BakerHostetler on

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, No. 13-720 (U.S. June 22, 2015), the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision with Justice Kagan writing for the majority, upheld its 1964 decision in Brulotte v. Thys, 379 U.S. 29, reaffirming...more

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Law on Post-Patent Royalties Differs Between Canada and the U.S.

The recent decision of the United States Supreme Court (USSC) in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment LLC (Kimble) highlights how a lack of knowledge of the law governing the intellectual property that is the subject of a...more

Foley Hoag LLP

How Not to Get Snared in Brulotte’s Web

Foley Hoag LLP on

The Supreme Court’s Kimble Decision Reminds Licensors and Licensees to Evaluate Post-Expiration Royalties with Care - On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court, in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, declined to overrule–on...more

Weintraub Tobin

Everything Old is New Again: Post-Expiration Patent Royalties are a Bad Idea!

Weintraub Tobin on

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court upheld the longstanding case law that prohibits a patent owner from receiving royalties after a patent has expired. In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC (June 22, 2015) 2015 U.S....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

How a Trade Secret Could Have Saved a Running Royalty From a Nearly Invincible Law

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, just handed down June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the 50 year old holding of Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U. S. 29 (1964), that patent royalties cannot extend beyond the...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

High Court Upholds Ban On Post-Expiration Patent Royalties While Recommending Loopholes

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Background - On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court left intact a 50-year-old rule prohibiting royalties for post-expiration use of a patent. In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, No. 13-720 litigation arose from Marvel’s...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Litigation Alert: Even Spider-Man Can't Defeat Ban on Post-Patent Expiration Royalties

Fenwick & West LLP on

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that “a patentee’s use of a royalty agreement that projects beyond the expiration date of the patent is unlawful per se.” 379 U.S. 29, 32 (1964). On June...more

47 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide