Reining in Remedies in Patent Litigation: Three (Increasingly Immodest) Proposals

By Cotter, Thomas F. | Santa Clara Computer & High Technology Law Journal, November 2013 | Go to article overview

Reining in Remedies in Patent Litigation: Three (Increasingly Immodest) Proposals


Cotter, Thomas F., Santa Clara Computer & High Technology Law Journal


TABLE OF CONTENTS  INTRODUCTION I. INJUNCTIONS AND STANDARD-ESSENTIAL PATENTS II. AWARDS OF PROFITS IN DESIGN PATENT CASES III. JURIES AND REASONABLE ROYALTIES CONCLUSION 

Introduction

Notwithstanding the passage of the America Invents Act in 2011, (1) and nearly a decade's worth of Supreme Court and Federal Circuit cases that have cut back on some of the latter court's earlier, more expansive, interpretations of patent rights, (2) criticism of the U.S. patent system only seems to intensify with every passing year. (3) Much, though hardly all, of the criticism centers on the conduct of patent assertion entities (PAEs)--otherwise known more pejoratively as "patent trolls"--those patent-holding entities which, according to Professor Colleen Chien, filed over 60% of all civil actions for U.S. patent infringement in 2012. (4) Many of these actions involve patents relating to software, business methods, telecommunications, and information technology (IT). (5) Only a small percentage of these lawsuits are believed to involve deliberate copying on the part of accused infringers; most result from independent invention on the part of companies that were, at least initially, unaware of the patents in suit. (6) To be sure, most pending patent applications are published eighteen months after filing, (7) and all of them become public records once the patent is granted. (8) Nevertheless, high-tech firms in particular generally ignore patents, (9) due both to the sheer quantities of patents granted and to the opacity with which they are drafted, which sometimes turns the "notice" function of patents into something of a joke. (10) Not surprisingly, U.S. patent litigation is also enormously expensive, (11) and the risk of crippling liability ever-present; in 2011 alone, there were six patent damages verdicts in excess of $100 million. (12) As a result, patent critics argue that, in many fields of technology, patents no longer serve their intended purpose of providing an incentive to invent and disclose but rather operate as, essentially, a tax on innovation. (13) Anyone who produces--or, in some instances, simply uses--a high-tech product or service automatically becomes an attractive target for patent litigation. (14)

In this environment, calls for further reform of the patent system have taken many forms, ranging from outright abolition of the patent system (15) to more targeted efforts directed at matters such as claim drafting and claim construction, disclosure, and patent prosecution, (16) and further reforms to areas such as patentable subject matter (17) and nonobviousness. (18) others have called for the introduction of new defenses to liability, such as an independent invention defense (19) or a broader experimental use defense; (20) or for "tailoring" certain aspects of the patent system, including the patent term, to the characteristics of different fields of technology. (21) Yet other suggestions go to the issue of patent enforcement, such as proposals for instituting specialized patent trial courts (22) or competing patent appellate courts; (23) or for switching over to some version of the "English Rule" under which the losing party would be responsible for the winner's attorney's fees in all or most, not just "exceptional," cases. (24)

My own scholarship has focused to a large extent on remedies and other aspects of patent enforcement, both in the United States and in other major patent systems, so it should come as no surprise that the ideas for reform that most readily occur to me tend to center on modifications to this area of patent law. (25) This essay will argue in favor of three reforms in particular, arranged in order of their likely political feasibility. The first, which has received the most attention thus far and appears to have the best prospect for making its way into mainstream U.S. (if not foreign) patent practice, is the adoption of a general presumption that a patent owner's commitment to license assertedly standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms disqualifies the patent owner from obtaining injunctive relief in any judicial or administrative forum. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Reining in Remedies in Patent Litigation: Three (Increasingly Immodest) Proposals
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.